The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 17    Average: 2.1/5]
32 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 6513
Rating: 2.1
Category: Misc
Date: 04/02/13 07:33 AM

32 Responses to The North Korean Nuclear Crisis

  1. Profile photo of Dead_mind
    Dead_mind Male 18-29
    303 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 7:33 am
    Link: The North Korean Nuclear Crisis - What You Aren`t being Told
  2. Profile photo of sweetrebelnc
    sweetrebelnc Female 18-29
    847 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 8:38 am
    Hmm, interesting. I usually don`t take videos like this too seriously, but that made a lot of sense. Or maybe I`m too paranoid. Who the F knows.
  3. Profile photo of tbored
    tbored Male 30-39
    178 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:00 am
    .............NK isn`t a bullied kid in need of a wet-nurse. NK is a little bully who needs an ass whopping and its slaves freed........but hey!.....nothing wrong with looking at it through some conspiracy glasses.
  4. Profile photo of Reignblazer
    Reignblazer Male 18-29
    2334 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:02 am
    While manipulation in order to fabricate reasons to invade other countries certainly fits US foreign policy, there`s no way they would actually be stupid enough to consider attacking China.

    Also, I`m sure NK got sanctioned for a reason.
  5. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:10 am
    #1 "Iraq Sanctions killed 500,000 children"
    a) It`s bullcrap.
    b) Madeline Albright!!!
    c) if the sanctions KILLED so many children, WHY did the liberals oppose military action which ended the Hussain Regime? WHY did they demand that the sanction be run for "a few more years" to have "full effect"? THEY (liberals) were the ones "killing children" ffs...

    #2 It was UN Sanctions, in both NK and Iraq and Iran, NOT the USA alone... facts, acquaint one`s self with them!

    #3 Madeline Albright, under Bill Clinton, went to North Korea and "negotiated" the end to their nuclear program! Hooray! 2 years later it was not only still going, it was TWICE as big! THAT is what cause these NK sanctions: Clinton`s failed appeasement...
  6. Profile photo of flying_ltj
    flying_ltj Male 18-29
    340 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:11 am
    Its funny, because this guy is repeating everything that we`ve already been told. Plus he`s trying to connect the dots/identify the details through an uneducated lens of internet armchair politics.
  7. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:28 am
    So, our response to their threats caused them to make the threats? Does this f***tard even grasp the concept of time?
  8. Profile photo of djwajda
    djwajda Male 40-49
    885 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:30 am
    Oh please,Lil Kim and his country have been given so many chances it isn`t funny.
  9. Profile photo of ak4775
    ak4775 Male 30-39
    354 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:48 am
    Yeah nothing new here except the pretty vid of flames. Just some dude regurgitating facts he heard on tv. Anybody who pays attention to world news already knows this, but I will say that the posturing by the US is childish and useless agitation. Un isn`t doing anything that Il hadn`t been doing before he kicked the bucket.
  10. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:57 am
    Yes and I suppose the death camps seen by satellite and written about by escapees are a fabrication "ob da ebilz USA!" There`s a good reason pretty much every country on earth is cutting them off.
  11. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 10:17 am
    OldOllie: You hit the nail on the head.
  12. Profile photo of whodat6484
    whodat6484 Male 30-39
    3909 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 10:31 am
    Yeah, he lost me right off the bat with the B-2 drills, which were part of that annual exercise. He`s basically saying that the US response to North Korea`s threats, flexing that B-2 muscle, is what`s causing them to threaten us.

    It`s basically some douchebag college kid`s attempt at making a shocking, tell-all Youtube video. Full of sh*tty graphics, flashy images, piss poor narration and that stoopid f*cking ominous music that`s supposed to set the mood but overpowers the narration completely.
  13. Profile photo of Modwain
    Modwain Male 40-49
    336 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 10:35 am
    old ollie, are you that old that you do not know the behaviour of the young anymore?
    I was always told that the best way to get kids to go to a certain area is to tell them they cant go there.. and if you want to make sure they dont go there, you tell them what it is and take away any curiosity in that direction.

    Funny enough, all teh war rethoric has been in line with the do not go there aproach, but i have seen very little explanation kind of rethoric. We dont want them to have boms? then give them a world in which they dont need them, dont give them a world that proves they need them.
    Is the north korean government a good one? hell no, but figthing fire with a bigger fire only proves that the bigger one is fire too. i like to put out fire with something else.

    oh, and for those of you that dont understand? fire consumes oxygen, guess who needs that. Then you will also know who will suffer the most
  14. Profile photo of Foote
    Foote Male 18-29
    109 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 10:39 am
    Lost me at "Much less powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.." PLEASE!?
  15. Profile photo of greenbasterd
    greenbasterd Male 18-29
    2377 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 11:00 am
    i like kimmy boy.. guys got guts
  16. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 11:23 am
    @Mr.5Rats
    a) 500,000 is the UNICEF figure, look it up.
    b) what?
    c) I personally don`t know any of "the liberals" who were for the sanctions. "The liberals" mostly know that civilians pay the biggest price. "The liberals" I know were opposed to military action in favor of letting the WEAPONS INSPECTORS run their full course to have "full effect", not the sanctions. A big difference you need to learn more about.

    #2 UN sanctions? Aren`t you one of those often spouting "The United States IS the UN"? Well, for the most part that`s true.

    #3 "negotiated" the end to their nuclear program? What a laugh! In just 6 hours of meetings with Kim Jong Il, Madeleine Albright was somehow able to accomplish what others had been failing at for decades? Rewrite history much? LOL
  17. Profile photo of onoffonoffon
    onoffonoffon Male 30-39
    2382 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:16 pm
    I thought all of this was to help feed the military industrial complex.
  18. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:27 pm
    @Foote: Nope, it`s true! The biggest of the 3 NK has "popped" was about half the tonnage of either two WW2 bombs...
    Still big though! Only a scale of degree to make a whopping BIG BOMB once you know how to set them off... (that`s the hard part).

    @chalket: So a UN agency claims the UN sanctions killed the children? It still doesn`t touch my c) argument.

    "The liberals" I know were opposed to military action in favor of letting the WEAPONS INSPECTORS run their full course to have "full effect", not the sanctions.
    Jesus Tapdancing Christ are you JOKING? It`s April 2 today dude! WHY do you think the sanctionswere imposed IN THE FIRST PLACE? Because Saddam threatened the lives of the inspectors and they had to flee the country! This was a DIRECT violation of the Cease Fire.
    A big difference you need to learn more about.
    Oh the irony! It BURNS...
  19. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:33 pm
    Aren`t you one of those often spouting "The United States IS the UN"? Well, for the most part that`s true.
    Quite the opposite, but don`t let a little thing like BEING 100% WRONG stop you...

    What a laugh! In just 6 hours of meetings with Kim Jong Il, Madeleine Albright was somehow able to accomplish what others had been failing at for decades?
    I strongly suggest you "lookitup" dude. She came back and Clinton CROWED about how they`d "solved the problem" with North Korea having a nuclear program! He lifted lots of (if not all of) the current US sanctions against NK.
    Of course NK didn`t stop it`s nuclear program at all... NOW who`s re-writing history?
  20. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4916 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:37 pm
    5Cats how you dare to swear?!!! ;-)
  21. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:41 pm





    Further stupidity will result in further taunting!
    You have been warned @chalket! ;-)
  22. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 12:42 pm
    5Cats how you dare to swear?!!!

    @piperfawn: What? This:

    Jesus Tapdancing Christ!

    That`s not swearing! It`s "blasphemy" ;-) (lolz!)
  23. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 3:24 pm
    Come down off your high horse, 5Cats, the altitude will give you a nose-bleed.

    "So a UN agency claims the UN sanctions killed the children?"
    It has even more validity when it`s self-criticism, eh?

    "doesn`t touch my c) argument"
    Maybe because your "c) argument" is sheer idiocy! The very thought that ANYONE, liberal or conservatard (to steal your fave suffix), should FAVOR killing thousands of Americans, 100`s of thousands of Iraqis and blowing around a trillion dollars as a means to ending sanctions. Sheer idiocy, I tell you! Now stop it and grow up!

    While you`re at it, STOP REWRITING THE PAST! "WHY do you think the sanctionswere imposed IN THE FIRST PLACE?"
    First, UN sanctions on Iraq started in 1990 when they invaded Kuwait. (Then we bombed all hell out of their water and power grids for good measure, that shouldn`t hurt civilians, right?) Second,

    (continued, @#$% inaccurate character limit)
  24. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm
    (continued)

    2002 November - UN weapons inspectors return to Iraq backed by a UN resolution which threatens serious consequences if Iraq is in "material breach" of its terms.

    2003 March - Chief weapons inspector Hans Blix reports that Iraq has accelerated its cooperation but says inspectors need more time to verify Iraq`s compliance.

    2003 March - UK`s ambassador to the UN says the diplomatic process on Iraq has ended; arms inspectors evacuate; US President George W Bush gives Saddam Hussein and his sons 48 hours to leave Iraq or face war.

    Source

    For some reason, I trust BBC News over your revisionist ideals, 5Cats.
  25. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 4:00 pm
    1998 October - Iraq ends cooperation with UN Special Commission to Oversee the Destruction of Iraq`s Weapons of Mass Destruction (Unscom).
    As Ghod is my witness @chalket: you are being stupid ON PURPOSE! It`s from YOUR source, so feel free to attack it.

    Saddam let them back in, it`s true! But when they actually tried to inspect something? They were told "we cannot guarantee you won`t be killed". So they left, AGAIN!

    SO: Oct 1998 to Nov 2002 = 4 years
    That`s NOT long enough for sanctions to work? srsly.

    Haven`t you gotten enough "irony burns" for one thread? Y`all should just admit I`m correct and give up already. You`re really embarrassing yourself...
  26. Profile photo of sonofd
    sonofd Male 40-49
    66 posts
    April 2, 2013 at 9:54 pm
    5cats,
    How in the crap do you misspell the word "God"?
  27. Profile photo of Modwain
    Modwain Male 40-49
    336 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 3:07 am
    basicly, all you are saying 5cats, is that there is only one form of diplomacy, and it is inforeced by gunboats...

    is 4 years long enough? i dont know, i doubt it to be honest, but the usa has spend far longer then 4 years to get Saddam in power. The whole war thingy was a wet dream of GWB. That, and to secure the oil.
    Not really sure how we got here from NK though
  28. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 5:49 am
    That, and to secure the oil.


    ROFL!!
  29. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 6:01 am


    Facts are not your friend. Now tell me how much sense it makes to leave there if it were about oil.
  30. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33134 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 6:52 am
    5cats, How in the crap do you misspell the word "God"?
    @sonofd: On purpose, that`s how! It`s useful to draw attention to it.

    @Modwain: You miss the point: This video and certain IAB idiots claim the "sanctions KILLED 500,000 CHILDREN" and no adults apparently... highly selective, eh?
    Anyhow: 500K / 4 years = 125K CHILDREN per year.
    So THEY (not ME) want 2 more years of sanctions? That`s 250,000 more DEAD CHILDREN!
    I say that`s bullcrap, the sanctions were:
    #1 Imposed and enforced by the UN
    #2 If Saddam chooses to feed his army rather than his people? What can we DO about that?
    #3 War is what happens when Diplomacy fails. Here it obviously failed after 4+ years, correct?

    How`d we get "here" from NK? Because right now, YEARS of sanctions have FAILED to stop the nuclear weapons program in NK, that`s how.
  31. Profile photo of RoboPatton
    RoboPatton Male 30-39
    2424 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 11:16 am
    Not saying I agree with the video, but some politicos would gladly inact war for financial or political gain.

    Also, holy poo this video has a lot of maraca shick-a-shick-a-shick.
  32. Profile photo of EgalM
    EgalM Male 30-39
    1707 posts
    April 3, 2013 at 11:20 am
    Clearly this man is more informed than the U.S. Military. *rolls eyes*

    Sure, say the media is misleading than use only media as references, genius.

Leave a Reply