The North Korean Nuclear Crisis

Submitted by: Dead_mind 4 years ago in Misc

What You Aren"t being Told
There are 31 comments:
Male 1,737
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.
0
Reply
Male 2,424
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.
0
Reply
Male 37,826
[quote]5cats, How in the crap do you misspell the word "God"?[/quote]
@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.
0
Reply
Male 14,334


Facts are not your friend. Now tell me how much sense it makes to leave there if it were about oil.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
[quote]That, and to secure the oil.
[/quote]

ROFL!!
0
Reply
Male 334
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
0
Reply
Male 71
5cats,
How in the crap do you misspell the word "God"?
0
Reply
Male 37,826
[quote]1998 October - Iraq ends cooperation with UN Special Commission to Oversee the Destruction of Iraq`s Weapons of Mass Destruction (Unscom).[/quote]
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...
0
Reply
Male 2,711
(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.
0
Reply
Male 2,711
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)
0
Reply
Male 37,826
[quote]5Cats how you dare to swear?!!![/quote]

@piperfawn: What? This:

[quote]Jesus Tapdancing Christ![/quote]

That`s not swearing! It`s "blasphemy" ;-) (lolz!)
0
Reply
Male 37,826





Further stupidity will result in further taunting!
You have been warned @chalket! ;-)
0
Reply
Male 5,081
5Cats how you dare to swear?!!! ;-)
0
Reply
Male 37,826
[quote]Aren`t you one of those often spouting "The United States IS the UN"? Well, for the most part that`s true.[/quote]
Quite the opposite, but don`t let a little thing like BEING 100% WRONG stop you...

[quote]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?[/quote]
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?
0
Reply
Male 37,826
@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.

[quote]"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.[/quote]
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.
[quote]A big difference you need to learn more about.[/quote]
Oh the irony! It BURNS...
0
Reply
Male 2,711
@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
0
Reply
Male 2,376
i like kimmy boy.. guys got guts
0
Reply
Male 109
Lost me at "Much less powerful than the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.." PLEASE!?
0
Reply
Male 334
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
0
Reply
Male 3,909
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.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
OldOllie: You hit the nail on the head.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
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.
0
Reply
Male 354
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.
0
Reply
Male 883
Oh please,Lil Kim and his country have been given so many chances it isn`t funny.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
So, our response to their threats caused them to make the threats? Does this f***tard even grasp the concept of time?
0
Reply
Male 339
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.
0
Reply
Male 37,826
#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...
0
Reply
Male 2,332
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.
0
Reply
Male 178
.............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.
0
Reply
Female 846
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.
0
Reply
Male 303
Link: The North Korean Nuclear Crisis [Rate Link] - What You Aren`t being Told
0
Reply