North Korea, Nuclear Threat, or Childish Antics?

[Deo]

As most of us should know, North Korea has been threatening of nuclear war.

What i would like to know, as their most recent missile launch has just passed, do you think they are a serious threat, or are they just desperate for attention?

maybe it's both. But i think they pose a threat, and have openly critisized the west, and other asian countrys (South Korea, Japan). BUT i do not think that this is a war-worthy threat, and diplomatically can be solved, they just need to return to the 6-party negotiations.

[Deo]

do you mean they WANT to be respected? currently they are only able in inflicy a small amount of damage to the us, with a (failed) taepodang II that has a *light* payload that can only reach certain parts of the west.

[ajames]

I think that it's just childish antics to get attention from US/Japan/SK.
There's no way in the world Kim Jong Il would launch any type of attack against another country. If he did the retribution would cost him his life or all of his power(NK being nuked/bombed to rubble) and he isn't willing to allow that to happen.

[Biolink]

North Korean missile pic:

http://www.pusanweb.com/photos/daeborum2003/sparkler.jpg


Unfortunately it died out moments later

[Deo]

haha, that's funny. and to ajames: that's what i think he wants the attention iran is getting, he wants to believe that the superpowers will help his people for him.

[Dysdaimon]

I personally think it's a bit of both. Even the most rational leaders are vulnerable when it comes to power and attention. NK might one day decide to risk it all to bring the US down from its pedestal. However, if you minus the population and the chances of war, it's still just a spoiled brat (NK) wanting to be better than the one on top currently (US).

[Biolink]

Jong-Il is a sick dude.He is also a little person to XD.Anyway the day he hits U.S. soil with a missile and kills alot of people is the day North Korea is wiped off the map...

[Delta]

I think that test he did really weakened his position, it showed the world that his ICBMs may not be able to strike at all, let alone a place half way around the globe. That being said, the capabilities of our own missle defense systems need to be questioned too, take for example that our own ICBM interceptors havn't had a successful test in nearly 4 years(Source (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_missiles.html)).

I also think it's interesting how we're still negotiating w/ North Korea when they have shown they accually have, and have much more potential for using, weapons of mass distruction. We invaded Iraq with much less evidence and provocation, why the shift in policy? Ooooooohhhhh, thats right! North Korea doesnt have oil.

[Hattori]

North Korea is pathetic. No one's willing to use WMDs for fear of MAD, but even if they unleashed their entire nuclear arsenal, it wouldn't be able to demolish South Korea, let alone Japan or China. Within minutes of launch detection, China would wipe it off the map if it even hinted at aggression, and the U.S. would retaliate with overwhelming firepower. It's only using its nuclear capabilities to exhort resources and funds out of the international community.

[Deo]

I think that test he did really weakened his position, it showed the world that his ICBMs may not be able to strike at all, let alone a place half way around the globe. That being said, the capabilities of our own missle defense systems need to be questioned too, take for example that our own ICBM interceptors havn't had a successful test in nearly 4 years(Source (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/cat_missiles.html)).

I also think it's interesting how we're still negotiating w/ North Korea when they have shown they accually have, and have much more potential for using, weapons of mass distruction. We invaded Iraq with much less evidence and provocation, why the shift in policy? Ooooooohhhhh, thats right! North Korea doesnt have oil.
actually our naval missile defense system has been around 80% effective, while our ground system is terrible.

and, you're right, north koreas missiles mean garbage.

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

ICBM's in small numbers will be rendered useless once our YAL-1A's are put into production next year. The United States will be able to swat them out of the sky like annoying insects. Once we possess them in significant numbers, then even rabid little dogs like North Korea won't even think about attacking us. It would be a pointless and suicidal gesture.

[Shinomori]

Hey.

You do not mess with the Taepodong. Pronounced, for those of us who speak ENGLISH, "type o' DONG".

Anyways.

The guy's a psycho. The whole world knows it. He's got nukes. The whole world knows it.

I just hope that we have some sort of working defense by the time he shoots these at us (which I believe is an inevitability, although I'm a pessimist :D) or else R.I.P DragonBlade, Jimmy, Red, and all you other cali-ans out there. :D

[Delta]

actually our naval missile defense system has been around 80% effective, while our ground system is terrible.

As I understand it our naval missle defense is effective at countering short to mid range missles, bu the ICBMs,which fly higher were our of the navy's reach. Thats not to say the navy cant help, they can track the missles to increase the accuracy of our ICBM counter-measures.

[Raican Katarin]

What happend to that 'Star Wars' defense system, was that all theory or is it in operation? I thought that was basically an orbital anti icbm missile batery :S

IMO Korea is far more of a threat than any middle east country, the USA and UK went into Iraq on the chance there COULD be WMD but we know for a fact korea now has the ability to launch them...but do they have the warheads? BUT like its all ready been said a power crazed dictator is not gunna throw away his total control of a country in a futile attemp to attack Japan,South Korea, America etc.

My theory is that Korea will one day join forces with the radical muslim states and some kind of war will spark off. Nuclear or not i think theres a war coming soon...

[Delta]

What happend to that 'Star Wars' defense system, was that all theory or is it in operation?

Ronald Reagan had dreams of shooting things out of the sky with lasers and shit, thats about it.

[Raican Katarin]

Ah ok i didnt know if it ever became reality...sounded a little to good to be true. Next Mr Bush will be funding Mobile suits for Nuclear defense ;)

[Biolink]

LOL.I'd probably join the army if I could pilot a Mobil Suit(Providing it looked like the Mobil Suit in Gundam Wing or Evangelion).

[shadow_of_89]

the Korean threat i think it's serious maybe not BC of Korea itself but maybe BC the united states are really going to lounch a military offensive......if korea has a nuke she will use it and so as USA...the result a nuclear war that will eventually wipe out humanity

[Deo]

What happend to that 'Star Wars' defense system, was that all theory or is it in operation? I thought that was basically an orbital anti icbm missile batery :S

IMO Korea is far more of a threat than any middle east country, the USA and UK went into Iraq on the chance there COULD be WMD but we know for a fact korea now has the ability to launch them...but do they have the warheads? BUT like its all ready been said a power crazed dictator is not gunna throw away his total control of a country in a futile attemp to attack Japan,South Korea, America etc.

My theory is that Korea will one day join forces with the radical muslim states and some kind of war will spark off. Nuclear or not i think theres a war coming soon...
The US is at "war" with North Korea already, in fact its the longest running war in american history.

(the korean war never ended, it was ended in a cease fire agreement, that still holds true today, no treaty was ever signed. which is why we still have troops on the parallel, in fact, skirmishes between troops break out every now and then, killing a few people.)

[Raican Katarin]

I totally forgot about that, i remember reading and thinking what the hell, basically that means south korea and the uk must technically still be at war with north Korea too.

Btw slightly offtopic but i recomend the film 'Brotherhood' for those of you interested in the Korean war. Made in South Korea last year i believe but its awesome.

(And hell yes mobile suits in the army id join in a flash)

[kashyap3]

As most of us should know, North Korea has been threatening of nuclear war.

the hell are u smoking
north korea just tested 6-7 long range missiles
1 of them [Taepodong II] which was merely capable of a long range attack
and has nuclear capacity

and it FAILED

NKorea just has CRUDE nuclear capacity, not refined enough to carry out a nuclear attack

its just pathetic to see the world start to whine when a country hasnt even succeeded in creating a capable missile

how is this any different when other dangerous dictatorial regimes like pakistan test their missiles

what does the U.S say then?

it keeps its mouth shut right?

just because its the regional U.S puppet

[Deo]

the hell are u smoking
north korea just tested 6-7 long range missiles
1 of them [Taepodong II] which was merely capable of a long range attack
and has nuclear capacity

and it FAILED

NKorea just has CRUDE nuclear capacity, not refined enough to carry out a nuclear attack

its just pathetic to see the world start to whine when a country hasnt even succeeded in creating a capable missile

how is this any different when other dangerous dictatorial regimes like pakistan test their missiles

what does the U.S say then?

it keeps its mouth shut right?

just because its the regional U.S puppet
They did threaten of nuclear war.

there's plenty of sources, its not like i pulled it out of no where.

go look on CNN, Fox News, ABC News, BBC News.

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/abl/ Ugh, these are going into production this year. The whole shooting things out of the sky with lasers fantasy is now real. They're good for all kinds of missiles, but they can only take out ICBM's in the boost stage. I'm sure that won't matter though since we'll probably have them stationed near any countries likely to use such weapons.

[Delta]

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/abl/ Ugh, these are going into production this year. The whole shooting things out of the sky with lasers fantasy is now real. They're good for all kinds of missiles, but they can only take out ICBM's in the boost stage. I'm sure that won't matter though since we'll probably have them stationed near any countries likely to use such weapons.

Interesting, I hope the testing they've done is enough, seems kinda complex, 3 different lasers to successfully disable the missle. If one of those lasers fails, is the whole thing screwed?

[Kyouka Suigetsu]

I would think so, but I'm not entirely sure. There was a documentary showing how the whole system would work. Unfortuantely, I forgot the name of the program. It was on the Military Channel though. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10805240/?GT1=7538 Here's an article showing the whole plethora of energy weapons the US has under development. Some are so powerful and accurate that they say we could deny all responsiblity. World domination here we come! :LOL:















just kidding

[Icestorm]

North Korea is currently a very poor nation.. they are at this point simply threatening inorder to gain aid with no strings attached.
Another thing.. North Korea (correct me if im wrong) is not a part of the UN so they are not part of the nuclear agreements act.. where as USA is very much a part of the UN. So therfore they would have to break this in order to fire back if it came to that.

[Lex]

I reckon that they're testing the worlds reaction, see how far they can go before someone tries throwing missiles back. What better way to test the worlds tollerance level.

[Icestorm]

uh.. UN nuclear weapons act.. unless attack is obvious or such a thing happens i dont think they will be likely to break this

[Delta]

I would think so, but I'm not entirely sure. There was a documentary showing how the whole system would work. Unfortuantely, I forgot the name of the program. It was on the Military Channel though.

Hmmmm... I'll keep an eye out for that..... I would imagine so though, if I remember right ICBMs move very fast, which is why one of the few things we can use to intercept them is, well, light.

That article was interesting btw, kinda reminds me of a story about some old physicist (Tessla mby?) who designed a super weapon, some particle beam or something, basicly it's just conceptual, that would end all wars. Countries would have arrays of these beams around their borders which could shoot down anything approaching (missles, enemy planes, ect.) but they couldnt turn the weapons on other countries because of the curvature of the earth. Of course now that we're putting these weapons in space it kind of changes the whole "ending all wars" thing to more of a "strike almost anywhere on the surface of the planet without warning" thing. Good times.

[hitsugaya131]

i think its a nuclear threat with what ive seen

its affected me
happened while i visited korea
now the plane course back is changed b/c of the missle threat...
have to take a longer path to avoid missiles just in case.

[~*StÓÑy RèL0ÂÐeD™]

yea... north korea better think something up fast... or else if its a nuclear war n USA is the attacker... everyone will get hit in the crossfire..

[shadow_of_89]

get hit is not the proper word.....exterminated is better......

[Deo]

yea... north korea better think something up fast... or else if its a nuclear war n USA is the attacker... everyone will get hit in the crossfire..
In this case, America won't attack first (i believe) because, North Korea is so poor, and just needs aid. and, to get the UN on our side, they need to attack first.

[Unholy]

if ther elike test missile like landed in the ocean, why not like aim the missile up and like shoot the moon so like the waves get ****ed up and everyone drowns? :)

[kashyap3]

They did threaten of nuclear war.

there's plenty of sources, its not like i pulled it out of no where.

go look on CNN, Fox News, ABC News, BBC News.

well obviously they will threaten nuclear war when being forced into a corner

[Shaehl]

well obviously they will threaten nuclear war when being forced into a corner

A corner that they themselves decided to hole up in. Don't try to portray them as some missunderstood, helpless group of people.

[kashyap3]

first of all, its this notion that the interest of the U.S is the same as world interest pisses me off
you seem to be one who believes in that

a country does whatever it can to defend itself, and countries like the U.S do whatever it can to put such rebellious countries down by involving "World" opinion

cmon, why such a lax way of maintaining discipline for the U.S
you have so many other dangerous countries fostering Nuclear capabilities, which are more advanced than north korea's programs..
do they meet with such hostilities

[Deo]

first of all, its this notion that the interest of the U.S is the same as world interest pisses me off
you seem to be one who believes in that

a country does whatever it can to defend itself, and countries like the U.S do whatever it can to put such rebellious countries down by involving "World" opinion

cmon, why such a lax way of maintaining discipline for the U.S
you have so many other dangerous countries fostering Nuclear capabilities, which are more advanced than north korea's programs..
do they meet with such hostilities
Their leaders aren't as unpredictable, or as wanting to prove their power as Kim Jong Il, and in this case, the US Interest, is the World Interest as no one wants NK to have nuclear weapons.

They aren't pushed into a corner, they hid in the corner.

Kim Jong Il chooses weapons over his people, he isn't misunderstood, he isn't misjudged, he is a horrible dictator. His people starve because the money that's supposed to go to them, goes to funding his "programs", he cares more about money and power than he does about the people he leads.

and you wonder why we choose him, and not someone else?

[mooks]

Their leaders aren't as unpredictable, or as wanting to prove their power as Kim Jong Il, and in this case, the US Interest, is the World Interest as no one wants NK to have nuclear weapons.

They aren't pushed into a corner, they hid in the corner.

Kim Jong Il chooses weapons over his people, he isn't misunderstood, he isn't misjudged, he is a horrible dictator. His people starve because the money that's supposed to go to them, goes to funding his "programs", he cares more about money and power than he does about the people he leads.

and you wonder why we choose him, and not someone else?


Y'know i ask that same question about the US everyday... why choose him, and not someone else?

Anyways- let's not forget what US intelligence is like (weapons of mass destruction, anybody?). Despite what american politicians preach- it's not that simple, it's not black and white, good and evil. Besides... the US are the dangerous ones- they are the only ones doing all the attacking (I believe the 9/11 tears have gone dry for a while- revenge has been done almost 3times over). I have yet to see another country go to war- I mean the US have done in 2 countries, they obviously have a list. And there is no such thing as US interest coinciding with World Interest! that notion is almost laughable... Maybe the US and Europe, but that's as far as it goes...

[Shaehl]

Y'know i ask that same question about the US everyday... why choose him, and not someone else?
Anyways- let's not forget what US intelligence is like (weapons of mass destruction, anybody?). Despite what american politicians preach- it's not that simple, it's not black and white, good and evil. Besides... the US are the dangerous ones- they are the only ones doing all the attacking (I believe the 9/11 tears have gone dry for a while- revenge has been done almost 3times over). I have yet to see another country go to war- I mean the US have done in 2 countries, they obviously have a list. And there is no such thing as US interest coinciding with World Interest! that notion is almost laughable... Maybe the US and Europe, but that's as far as it goes...

For the record, it has recently been revealed that there were in fact, WMDs in Iraq. Read this: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

"Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered aproximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."

[Delta]

For the record, it has recently been revealed that there were in fact, WMDs in Iraq. Read this: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/...classified.pdf

"Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered aproximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."

Huh, thats odd, because this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4169107.stm) article says that we've never found any weapons and we've accually stopped looking for them. To quote the article:

"Former head of UN weapons inspections Hans Blix also said there was no surprise in the announcement.

"We have believed that there weren't any weapons since around May or June 2003. First came David Kay in September 2003 [who said] that he hadn't found any weapons and that was a big sensation - but he thought that there were programmes still,""

This is why I watch the Daily Show on Comedy Central if I want real news and Fox if I want to laugh.

[Shaehl]

Huh, thats odd, because this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4169107.stm) article says that we've never found any weapons and we've accually stopped looking for them. To quote the article:

"Former head of UN weapons inspections Hans Blix also said there was no surprise in the announcement.

"We have believed that there weren't any weapons since around May or June 2003. First came David Kay in September 2003 [who said] that he hadn't found any weapons and that was a big sensation - but he thought that there were programmes still,""

This is why I watch the Daily Show on Comedy Central if I want real news and Fox if I want to laugh.

That article is a year old. This report was declassified very recently. Just because the link to the report was located on the Fox News website, does not mean its credibility is reduced. Fact is, that is a government report. Despite what you think of the Fox News channel, they could not put together a fake document like that legally (the New York Times has already reserved the spot of treasonist press group).

[Delta]

That article is a year old. This report was declassified very recently. Just because the link to the report was located on the Fox News website, does not mean its credibility is reduced. Fact is, that is a government report. Despite what you think of the Fox News channel, they could not put together a fake document like that legally.

The weapons that report talks about are all thought to be made before 1991, so the "active WMD programs" that we went to war about, dont exist. You're right, they didnt make up that government report, they're just reporting on things that have no relivence to the stated reasons we went to war.

(the New York Times has already reserved the spot of treasonist press group)

How the hell can a report about the government monitoring susspected terrorists financial information be treasonous when the government has been talking about it themselves (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002546.html) since not long after 9/11?

[mooks]

For the record, it has recently been revealed that there were in fact, WMDs in Iraq. Read this: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf
"Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered aproximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."

Mm-hmm.... tell em, Delta

Well, I hope you do know the full story on that... That information is quite outdated, not to mention that the degraded mustard or sarin nerve agents along with the scud missiles were all depleted. Get your facts right.

I know all the nonsense surrounding the credibility of FOXNews but the fact is- they are a biased news station that rely on half-truths. FOr example... yes, they DID find weapons in Iraq.. what they forgot to mention... they were all depleted or unfit for use- they didn't lie but they forget to mention..

There is a list of stations that incorporated video news releases (VNRs) and/or related satellite media tours (SMTs) into their news broadcasts, without adequate disclosure to viewers.
http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/stationlist

[Sarteck]

Mm-hmm.... tell em, Delta
Well, I hope you do know the full story on that... That information is quite outdated, not to mention that the degraded mustard or sarin nerve agents along with the scud missiles were all depleted. Get your facts right.
I know all the nonsense surrounding the credibility of FOXNews but the fact is- they are a biased news station that rely on half-truths. FOr example... yes, they DID find weapons in Iraq.. what they forgot to mention... they were all depleted or unfit for use- they didn't lie but they forget to mention..
There is a list of stations that incorporated video news releases (VNRs) and/or related satellite media tours (SMTs) into their news broadcasts, without adequate disclosure to viewers.
http://www.prwatch.org/fakenews/stationlist
Meh... I actually don't think that FOX is a biased news station. But let's stick to the topic, and take your information--that they found weapons, but that the weapons could not be used in their current state. This begs the questions: "Why did they have the weapons?" and "Why were they hiding them?" Their state of usefulness is irrelevant to those questions.

Lets say Little Jimmy has a Crack Pipe hidden under his bed that his mother finds. Now, Little Jimmy doesn't have any crack for the pipe, but his mother will undoubtedly wonder why Jimmy would have the pipe in the first place, and since he is hiding it, she would assume that he was planning to use it.

[mooks]

Well, the weapons they found could not exactly be considered for mass destruction... whatever way you look at it... they never found what they were looking for... Just before the war there was reports from intelligence or whatever that they had weapons that could be deployed in a matter of hours... The contrast of what they said they had, compared to what they had found was grossly exaggerated...
And besides- how can a nation not have any weapons? there's no such thing... maybe in Sudan- but they don't even have a government there...

Let's say Jimmy had a little crack pipe under his bed that his mother finds... But, Jimmy doesn't have a mother! who is this coming into his room?

[Sarteck]

Well, the weapons they found could not exactly be considered for mass destruction... whatever way you look at it... they never found what they were looking for... Just before the war there was reports from intelligence or whatever that they had weapons that could be deployed in a matter of hours... The contrast of what they said they had, compared to what they had found was grossly exaggerated...
And besides- how can a nation not have any weapons? there's no such thing... maybe in Sudan- but they don't even have a government there...
Let's say Jimmy had a little crack pipe under his bed that his mother finds... But, Jimmy doesn't have a mother! who is this coming into his room?
All right, let's say Jimmy's brother, then. Heh. Same scenario.

Now, while the production of Sarin does require some chemical expertise, you can find How-To's on Mustard even on the Internet. It doesn't take a Doctorate in chemical engineering to know how to make it, and with the kind of resources Iraq could drum up (and already had, in phosphorous trichloride and thionylchoride), you can imagine that it'd be easy to produce in mass quantities, in a matter of hours.

Grossly exaggerated? No, I wouldn't say so.

[Deo]

... Ok, the US is the one that does the attacking lately, but that's our president, not our people, keep that in mind.

The US will not start an invasion of another country because our president is pretty much now what they consider a "lame duck" (or will be come november)

that does not change the fact that North Korea makes threats, threats that should be taken seriously., And you must admit, invading afghanistan wasn't bad, but iraq was (what the majority of the US public's opinion is anyway)

[Delta]

Meh... I actually don't think that FOX is a biased news station. But let's stick to the topic, and take your information--that they found weapons, but that the weapons could not be used in their current state. This begs the questions: "Why did they have the weapons?" and "Why were they hiding them?" Their state of usefulness is irrelevant to those questions.

You're right, the fact that those weapons exist probly say alot about Saddam's intentions, but the fact remains that what we were told we were going to war about, useable WMDs and active WMD programs in Iraq, dont exist. DOnt get me wrong, Saddam is a prick and the world is better off now that he's out of power, but there are pleanty of other leaders like that in the world today, that have long histories of human rights violations ect. that we dont touch, either because they're important trading partners or their country doesnt have oil or anything else we want.

And you must admit, invading afghanistan wasn't bad, but iraq was (what the majority of the US public's opinion is anyway)

Right, because there were terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, we knew that, and we knew that places like this were where the terrorists that attcked us on 9/11 might have trained. It made sense to knock out those facilities, but attacking Iraq, which doesnt have nearly as strong ties to terrorism as some of the other countries in the middle east do, makes no damn sense.

[mooks]

All right, let's say Jimmy's brother, then. Heh. Same scenario.
Now, while the production of Sarin does require some chemical expertise, you can find How-To's on Mustard even on the Internet. It doesn't take a Doctorate in chemical engineering to know how to make it, and with the kind of resources Iraq could drum up (and already had, in phosphorous trichloride and thionylchoride), you can imagine that it'd be easy to produce in mass quantities, in a matter of hours.
Grossly exaggerated? No, I wouldn't say so.


The reason I say grossly exaggerated is because of what they said they had, compared to what they found. Everything is a link of possibilities of how they could get a few weapons- compared to how they said they had an arsenal waiting to be deployed..

Instead they have certain raw materials and How-To guides on how to use them... The reliance on speculation is just too much to take seriously...


And I gotta say to DEO... invading Afghanistan was a terrible idea... It wasn't like the country attacked the US... Bin Laden is from Saudi, And despite how bad the taliban was-it had nothing to do with 9/11- there are much worse dictatorships going on than the taliban now and then.. EVERY third world nation has some sort of faction against the US(surprise, surprise). Even if invading Afghanistan can be justified from an American point of view(they hate our freedom!)- the death toll was certainly inexcusable.. if afghani deaths are ignorable by their standards.. then the 20,000 dead american soldiers should say something..

[Delta]

And I gotta say to DEO... invading Afghanistan was a terrible idea... It wasn't like the country attacked the US... Bin Laden is from Saudi, And despite how bad the taliban was-it had nothing to do with 9/11- there are much worse dictatorships going on than the taliban now and then.. EVERY third world nation has some sort of faction against the US(surprise, surprise). Even if invading Afghanistan can be justified from an American point of view(they hate our freedom!)- the death toll was certainly inexcusable.. if afghani deaths are ignorable by their standards.. then the 20,000 dead american soldiers should say something..

Dude.... what are you talking about? The Taliban was harboring Al-Qaeda, who we know attacked us on 9/11, so we invaded Afghanistan, bombed terrorist training camps and took the Taliban out of power. And what are you talking about 20,000 dead American soldiers?

[Draffut]

As most of us should know, North Korea has been threatening of nuclear war.
What i would like to know, as their most recent missile launch has just passed, do you think they are a serious threat, or are they just desperate for attention?
maybe it's both. But i think they pose a threat, and have openly critisized the west, and other asian countrys (South Korea, Japan). BUT i do not think that this is a war-worthy threat, and diplomatically can be solved, they just need to return to the 6-party negotiations.

I shouldn;t be talking abotu this, but North Korea is a very big threat. It is mostly just a show to get attention, but they could very possibly turn agressive in no time at all.

And I gotta say to DEO... invading Afghanistan was a terrible idea... It wasn't like the country attacked the US... Bin Laden is from Saudi, And despite how bad the taliban was-it had nothing to do with 9/11- there are much worse dictatorships going on than the taliban now and then.. EVERY third world nation has some sort of faction against the US(surprise, surprise). Even if invading Afghanistan can be justified from an American point of view(they hate our freedom!)- the death toll was certainly inexcusable.. if afghani deaths are ignorable by their standards.. then the 20,000 dead american soldiers should say something..

You want to talk to me abotu bad invasions? i am open ears. I am also in the US military, so i have dealt with it first-hand. As someone else said, they had a hand in 9/11, 20,000 dead is a very exagerated number, and every one of those soilders knw what he was signing up for when he enlisted. We do not have a draft. As soon as they signed on that doted line, thier life was america's to use as it saw fit. And i know this is true for myself also.

[mooks]

whoops wrong stat for the wrong war... my bad-

Well, the taliban and Al-qaeda are different...
I understand taking out al-qaeda, they HAD to, it was their brainchild anyway.. but not the taliban. The taliban were an oppressive regime, i get that, it still had nothing to do with al-qaeda. The connection between the two is vague and lacks detail... thus no credibility outside the US. the taliban harbored Osama bin Laden-who at the time was not in a senior position in al-qaeda.. until later when US started talkin about invasion.

Al-qaeda was just a CIA sponsored gathering of Mujahadeen fighters from all arab states to fight the Soviets.. like a Jihad against communism- which the Government loved and supported-and Reagan even expressed his support and excitement of this... the US put in the money-the Pakistani's put in the logistics, a certain person, much favored was put in charge of overseeing this.. and 'the base' was born... ofcourse you all know this...

After the soviets pull out- al-qaeda is abandoned and civil war starts after 6yrs of war- ordinary farmers and peasants group together, and get rid of the warlords and al-qaeda leaders fighting for villages... the people literally overcome them and the taliban is born- with the poorest of society running the country and imposing their version of Islam and culture onto the country... the Pakistani's and the Saudi's convince the US to support the taliban because they were anti-Irani and agreed for an american pipeline to be built once the country was stable.. therefore the CIA helps taliban conquer southern afghanistan. BUT there is friction between the US and Argentina who are both building pipelines in afghanistan- the taliban decide to change their mind ... making the US really, really angry, then they refuse to give bin laden up (1994) making them even more mad. And demand for human rights begin.. Argentina don't ask such questions so they got the pipeline. African embassies are bombed in 1998- bin laden is blamed- tomahawks are fired at bases in afghanistan, pipeline is officially abandoned.. bin laden moves to Pakistan.. 9/11 happens, bin laden is at it again.. al-qaeda must be stopped- al-qaeda and taliban must be stopped.. invasion of sovereign nation begins.. Not one person on the 'list' is Afghani...

that's the way I see it...