Kim Jong-Un is the one you guys mean. The youngest son (as far as anybody knows). He is the real pivot now and in the next few years. Will he, being younger be more sympathetic to others, or will he be just as brainwashed as everybody else and possibly be even more erratic?

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

I'm pretty sure almost nobody likes North Korea. They'll be wrecked if they pursue this any further, especially when you consider the previously-rising tensions that N. Korea has been bringing to the table.

[hide]

 

[/hide]

Jesus, two "Post of the Thread"s by the same person.

 

Drizzle you're on fire.

[hide]

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

 

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.

Some smart ass mother [bleep]ers trying to sell weed on yo corner. YO CORNER. What ya gonna do? Stand there as the [racist term] disrespects your corner, or [bleep] slap that mother [bleep]er cold?

 

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.

Some smart ass mother [bleep]ers trying to sell weed on yo corner. YO CORNER. What ya gonna do? Stand there as the [racist term] disrespects your corner, or [bleep] slap that mother [bleep]er cold?

Anyways, North Korea keeps saying they want to nuke the west coast of the United States, as far as I know*. So It's kind of like the weed trafficer throwing molotov cocktails at your house. He can't throw them far enough yet, but he's getting stronger.

 

*If I'm wrong, please tell me, but I remember hearing this somewhere.

Okay I'm on this. Just get me a bowie knife, a bow with ~30 arrows, a raft, a paperclip, and a rubber band. Wait, add a argyle sweater-vest to that, nothing stings more than being killed by someone in an argyle sweater-vest.

[hide]

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

[hide]

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

 

I think we should leave the whole Iraq debate for another thread if necessary, it's been flogged to death.

 

 

One question, does the North really have any motivation to invade another country? They might throw a hissy fit and attack the borders in the name of self-defence, but I can't imagine why they would want to leave their country to invade another. I always thought they had the idea that North Korea was some kind of perfect place that shouldn't get involved with the 'outside world'.

 

'Nothing to envy...'

NK could never win a war in the region. They're trying to gain leverage over the UN in order to receive much needed assistance (at least as far as I can tell).

“Should the South Korean puppet group dare intrude into our territorial waters even 0.001 mm, our revolutionary armed forces will unhesitatingly continue taking merciless military counter-actions against it,” North Korea said in a statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency after the shelling.

 

Sounds like they're blustering to me. Still, I hope this doesn't escalate (I have a number of South Korean friends).

[hide]

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

 

I think we should leave the whole Iraq debate for another thread if necessary, it's been flogged to death.

 

 

One question, does the North really have any motivation to invade another country? They might throw a hissy fit and attack the borders in the name of self-defence, but I can't imagine why they would want to leave their country to invade another. I always thought they had the idea that North Korea was some kind of perfect place that shouldn't get involved with the 'outside world'.

 

'Nothing to envy...'

 

It wasn't a debate, or even close. It was a comparison.

 

To be honest, if they get enough power, they'll most likely want to grow (i.e. invading other countries). Whether they'll be successful or not, that's a whole different issue, but regardless, one the US most likely won't want to take.

Everyone aim their missiles at North Korea pronto! Wipe 'em off the map so we will have nothing more to worry about! After all:

 

 

I'm pretty sure almost nobody likes North Korea.

 

And lol Sarah P.

one of my friends from HS actually went there this year to serve (S. Korea still does conscription)

One question, does the North really have any motivation to invade another country? They might throw a hissy fit and attack the borders in the name of self-defence, but I can't imagine why they would want to leave their country to invade another. I always thought they had the idea that North Korea was some kind of perfect place that shouldn't get involved with the 'outside world'.

Of course they have the motivation to. The thing is, do they think they have the means to do it? You see, the image of a "perfect Korea" is just the military selling propganda to the civies so they don't think their lives suck. The military KNOWS the West is better for their people, and if they ever found out, the military will be wrong and thus loosing control and faith with the people.

 

So in essence, it's the classic parent-child saying "Everything's ok". Really, its not, the parents know this, but the kid accepts it.

One question, does the North really have any motivation to invade another country? They might throw a hissy fit and attack the borders in the name of self-defence, but I can't imagine why they would want to leave their country to invade another. I always thought they had the idea that North Korea was some kind of perfect place that shouldn't get involved with the 'outside world'.

Of course they have the motivation to. The thing is, do they think they have the means to do it? You see, the image of a "perfect Korea" is just the military selling propganda to the civies so they don't think their lives suck. The military KNOWS the West is better for their people, and if they ever found out, the military will be wrong and thus loosing control and faith with the people.

 

So in essence, it's the classic parent-child saying "Everything's ok". Really, its not, the parents know this, but the kid accepts it.

 

Damn that's messed up. I see now, it's a power thing, I should have known.

 

Even if the North overpowered the South's military, they'll never get the South Korean civilians to comply. You can stop them from learning about free markets, communication and democracy, but you can't make them unlearn what they already know.

 

It's just a real pity that it's coming to this.

One question, does the North really have any motivation to invade another country? They might throw a hissy fit and attack the borders in the name of self-defence, but I can't imagine why they would want to leave their country to invade another. I always thought they had the idea that North Korea was some kind of perfect place that shouldn't get involved with the 'outside world'.

Of course they have the motivation to. The thing is, do they think they have the means to do it? You see, the image of a "perfect Korea" is just the military selling propganda to the civies so they don't think their lives suck. The military KNOWS the West is better for their people, and if they ever found out, the military will be wrong and thus loosing control and faith with the people.

 

So in essence, it's the classic parent-child saying "Everything's ok". Really, its not, the parents know this, but the kid accepts it.

 

Damn that's messed up. I see now, it's a power thing, I should have known.

 

Even if the North overpowered the South's military, they'll never get the South Korean civilians to comply. You can stop them from learning about free markets, communication and democracy, but you can't make them unlearn what they already know.

 

It's just a real pity that it's coming to this.

Want to think something else that's bad?

 

If and when Western nations invade North Korea, thousands of North Korean civilians will be killed. Civilians that are forced to live in such a system and civilians that are completely innocent in respect to what their military government stands for.

Small conflicts happen all the time. There is always a possibility that they can escalate into something bigger. But you shouldn't make any dire assumptions until it has at least played out for a short while.

[hide]

I just remembered something, didn't one of those Kim spawnlings recently get promoted to general? If so, it seems that he is loonier than the father. He is set to take over too I believe.

 

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.

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.

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.

 

I never justified the Korean war, nor even close. I gave a reason why we went there, doesn't mean that reason is justified. America stays here, doesn't go anywhere else, a country gets out of hand, starts invading other countries, grows rapidly, and attacks us (since we already have a huge target on our back, being one of the top super powers in the world). You don't want a war on our own soil. And did you just mention ruining MY credibility for the war in Iraq? (glances down at a certain phrase in siggy)

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.

Yes, the official estimate for murdering Iraqi civilians by the US government is only 100,000 in 6years of war [some sources claim the death toll is as high as 1million, although that is unlikely]. I'm sure that's a very tight estimate as well. Not to mention minority groups have been decimated in Iraq since the fall of Saddam due to persecution by insurgents [such as Christians in general, Armenians, Assyrians, Mandaeans]. So where are the undeniable results?

 

It is easy for a foreign influence to condemn someone from the outside. I'm not defending Saddam, but America arguably did more harm then help. American interventionism reflects the idea that too many cooks spoil the soup.

America arguably did more harm then help.

 

Actually, no we didn't. Suddam was committing mass genocide over on his own people. I'd like to see where you got your numbers from, as we're not allowed to shoot unless our life is in danger. Sure, there are some soldiers who probably wouldn't care, but I can guarantee there's at least one soldier in every platoon who would have brought it up to his chain of command. The US government doesn't want to harm the innocent, as that's unnecessary blood on our hands, we want to take care of the insurgents, and try to curb the terrorism, granted that's impossible to do.