N. Korea paper: 'Burning hatred' for U.S.

[Dennis S.]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">SEOUL, South Korea -- Amid a row over its nuclear weapons program, North Korea&#39;s ruling party newspaper has fired a barb at Washington, saying the country is ready to deliver "bitter defeat and death" to a threatening United States.[/b][/quote]


Story (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/12/14/korea.nukes/index.html)

Jeez... What&#39;s wrong with those Koreans? Are they trying to start another war? Like the Korean War wasn&#39;t bad enough already http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[Bucky]

I&#39;m guessing that they think we are too distracted to deal with them right now.

I&#39;m guessing that we would have hit their production facilities by now if we believed that they weren&#39;t already nuke capable.

[Dennis S.]

You think they are? Fun... http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[Nxs]

We are just pissin everyone off lately, Japan, Korea, Iraq. There is a few more I read ut not sure who they were. http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Bucky]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dennis S. @ Dec. 15 2002,02:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You think they are? Fun... Â*http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/b][/quote]
Well, I&#39;m playing armchair general here.. but historically we haven&#39;t hesitated to make strikes on facilities that could be producing nukes... so I&#39;m guessing that they may already have some. Or we think they do, amounts to same thing.

<------- On a more fun note http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kaotik]

what would the yankees do if some country said, "we dont like you guys having all these weapons of mass destruction, we&#39;re going to confinscate them for our safety" Â*the yanks would laugh, so wtf do they think they get the right to do this to other countries?, yanks push their weight around too much, and its going to (eventually) come back to haunt them.

I have nothing against yankee citizens, when i say yanks, i dont meen you civilians, i mean those geneous crack-heads that are running your country.
oh, and all the rich blue blood fkrs that support them, so the honest little person could never get any power to change things.
[edit]
Â*It would have been great if the person who invented the gun ended up shooting himself dead before it was released, or the people making the a-bomb, woulda kuff&#39;d up and killed them selves. what a world we would live in then,... we&#39;d tie bush and suddam&#39;s left arms together and let them fight to the death, all wars would have been fought like this, instead of sending thousands of innocent troops over to their death&#39;s, while the ones who caused the war sit back in a chair, watching, waiting.

im just goin on a big ol rant here eh
[edit]
what no ones gonna pick this apart? http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[firefly]

Just for that I am gonna divert a few Spectre Gunships to hit Canada.
As was so well put in Southpark....
"Blame Canada, Blame Canada, its not even a country anyways&#33;"
http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[firefly]

As for the US pushing our weight around.....
It wasnt until the World Wars that the US really abandoned its philosophy of isolationism. World War 2, the US did not "push its weight around" until we were attacked. When countries get into deep crap, they look to the US to bail them out. In doing so, the US has made many enemies. We backed Iraq against Iran, then Iran against Iraq, etc etc. if we subscribed to the "Godfather" philosophy" we would kill them all, even the children so that they may not later come to avenge their fathers. Instead we now get the kids whose fathers we killed or helped kill looking to put a dent in the US. An endless cycle begins and so now we have to go around trying to cover our own arse.
China hates us for our stance against communism which is further enraged by the US&#39;s recognition of Taiwan (a breakaway republic of China) as a sovereign democratic nation.
The US does often have questionable judgements in its decisions on which of its "interests" it should protect. the fact is that Iraq invading Kuwait = bad. Somali warlords starving thousands of people = bad.
So what kind of an idiot would sit around waiting to be attacked? The article just shows further proof as to why the US has to take certain actions. We can either wait for Iraq to make use of their biological and nuclear capabilities, or we can do something about it.

North Korea has been thumping their chest for years, and moreso made the statements about their constructing nuclear capabilities because they dont like that the US is trying to force them into complying with anti-nuclear treaties. They just want to be one of the big boys. Ignore them? No Focus alot of attention on them? No If they tried to attack, they could find minimal regional support. Any middle east support would have to go too great a distance, and the US would have too much strategic positioning on them with the Philippines.

[Bucky]

Firefly, did you catch that 100+ meg movie of that spectre gunning down those terrorists?

[firefly]

yah, pretty interesting wasnt it

[Dennis S.]

Being Canadian, I&#39;d have to partially support kaotik on this issue... USA DID get its ass into some really unnecessary conflicts, and by doing that earned lots of enemies all around the globe. While Desert Storm was justified, like was WW2. But what with Vietnam, Korean conflict, recent situation in Serbia, supporting Afghanis with weapons and military councelors in the 80&#39;s Russo-Afghan war? I don&#39;t see any reason for those wars except for wantng to get more political influence. Like yanks really cared four South Vietnamese, South Koreans, Albanians, Afghanis and their local conflicts? Yeah, right...

But then again, kaotik, USA is doing a fine job right now fighting terrorism and for that they got my full support... Well, unless it comes to starting a war on Iraq instead making it disarm itself...

[Dennis S.]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bucky @ Dec. 15 2002,22:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Firefly, did you catch that 100+ meg movie of that spectre gunning down those terrorists?[/b][/quote]
Has anyone got a link for that?

[Bucky]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dennis S. @ Dec. 15 2002,21:08)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bucky @ Dec. 15 2002,22:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Firefly, did you catch that 100+ meg movie of that spectre gunning down those terrorists?[/b][/quote]
Has anyone got a link for that?[/b][/quote]
I don&#39;t know of a link, I got it from a guy who was hosting on the WW2OL boards for a short time. He took it down a while ago http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

I&#39;ll give you a brief overview..

A Spectre gunship is a C130 that is armed to the teeth, carries 2 40mm autocannons, a 105mm howitzer and some other toys.

The vid the view from a spectre&#39;s gunsights as it opens up on a group of terrorists who obviously had no clue that anybody was watching them, they were just walking around clumped up in groups.

They were literally chasing individuals down with 40mm rounds. Very chilling.

[firefly]

Why fight the vietnam war?
Actually it was originally fought by the French(thus the North and South Vietnam split, because of China&#39;s spreading communist regime. Â*As per the Truman Doctrine, the US has sworn "to protect free peoples". Â*In other words to keep them out of communist dictatorships. Â*As per the domino theory, if Vietnam fell to communism, so would Thailand, India and Pakistan, and could even stretch to the Phillipines, Japan, and Australia. Â*Communism has always been seen as bad, and protecting democracy has always been a platform for US involvement. Â*How the US went about said political structuring may have been rather "undemocratic", but it saw it as protecting its "interests".
The Korean War was led again by China, as well as the Soviets (that big bad Stalin guy who had spread comunism to China) who wanted to sread communism in the colony that was now reliquished from the control of Japan as per treaty after WW2. Â*Given that the US was also now setting up bases in Okinawa and other areas of Japan, Korea also presented a strategic position, specifically noted by Stalin. Â*Mao of China liked the Idea since they planned to invade Taiwan, and going against Stalin&#39;s idea to take South Korea might have lost China Soviet support in their invasion. Â*The US had already pulled out their troops from the area, so neither country figured the US to much care nor be in strategic position to do anything if they did care.

The Russo-Afghani War was of the same ilk, Russia working to expand communism, the US protecting its interests, especialy its hold on oil resources.

With Kosovo, again there was threat to democracy and it was widely speculated that if Yugoslvia fell, so could Greece and the Balkans. Â*Milosevik was also publicly accused of war crimes, murdering thousands of his own people in this bloddy civil war. Â*Like with Somalia, the US went in to stop the genocide, as well as safeguard democracy.

SPECTRE Gunship, leading its shots. (http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~jonesdl/gunship_video_divx.avi)

there ya go, not sure how long it will be up.

[Bucky]

You would also have to consider how confronting the spread of Communism contributed to it&#39;s eventual collapse. I&#39;m sure it still would have happened eventually, but would it have taken longer?

[firefly]

As with Hitler&#39;s defeat, Communism&#39;s spread was halted both by pro-activism and poor choices of leaders.

[Dennis S.]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Firefly @ Dec. 16 2002,00:04)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why fight the vietnam war?
Actually it was originally fought by the French(thus the North and South Vietnam split, because of China&#39;s spreading communist regime. Â*As per the Truman Doctrine, the US has sworn "to protect free peoples". Â*In other words to keep them out of communist dictatorships. Â*As per the domino theory, if Vietnam fell to communism, so would Thailand, India and Pakistan, and could even stretch to the Phillipines, Japan, and Australia. Â*Communism has always been seen as bad, and protecting democracy has always been a platform for US involvement. Â*How the US went about said political structuring may have been rather "undemocratic", but it saw it as protecting its "interests".
The Korean War was led again by China, as well as the Soviets (that big bad Stalin guy who had spread comunism to China) who wanted to sread communism in the colony that was now reliquished from the control of Japan as per treaty after WW2. Â*Given that the US was also now setting up bases in Okinawa and other areas of Japan, Korea also presented a strategic position, specifically noted by Stalin. Â*Mao of China liked the Idea since they planned to invade Taiwan, and going against Stalin&#39;s idea to take South Korea might have lost China Soviet support in their invasion. Â*The US had already pulled out their troops from the area, so neither country figured the US to much care nor be in strategic position to do anything if they did care.

The Russo-Afghani War was of the same ilk, Russia working to expand communism, the US protecting its interests, especialy its hold on oil resources.

With Kosovo, again there was threat to democracy and it was widely speculated that if Yugoslvia fell, so could Greece and the Balkans. Â*Milosevik was also publicly accused of war crimes, murdering thousands of his own people in this bloddy civil war. Â*Like with Somalia, the US went in to stop the genocide, as well as safeguard democracy.

SPECTRE Gunship, leading its shots. (http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~jonesdl/gunship_video_divx.avi)

there ya go, not sure how long it will be up.[/b][/quote]
Sure, I agree with you. All those wars were useful to the USA who had involvement in pretty much every single one of them for this or that reason. But it wasn&#39;t really to defend those people or anything like that, was it? More people died from the hands of Americans than would have originally, if USA wouldn&#39;t interfer.

Let&#39;s see, Vietnam, 25,000,000 Vietnamese from both North and South dead, agent sprayed all over the country that people are still dying from. 60,000 American KIA or MIA, appeoxmately 3-4 times more wounded. The result? USA withdraws, VCs take over the country still, the same people that USA supported are left behind and die at the hands of VCs. Give me one good thing that happened because of USA&#39;s intervention.

Korea, don&#39;t remember the exact figure of dead from American side, but North Korea loses millions of people. Result? South Korea and North Korea hate each other until now. Lots of families get separated and will never see each other again. USA has an enemy with possible nuclear capabilities as we speak. Great&#33;

Afghanistan. Russians withdraw, losing roughly 20,000 people and 60,000 wounded or incapacitated. 350,000 Afghans dead, 250,000 injured, more than 2 millions are refugees in other countries. After Soviet&#39;s withdrawal rival clans take control over the country. That&#39;s where Taliban comes to power, and yes, it was originally supported by the USA and fighting with US&#39;s weapons, while Russia supported North Alliance in the war. American instructors trained a lot of future Taliban&#39;s fighters and most of the weapons used by Taliban were supplied by USA a long time ago. The result we know, Taliban occupying the country, helping Al Qaeda and eventually 9/11.

Serbia... some 1,500 civilians are killed, NATO-led troops bombs telecentres, town centres and bridges with civilians on all of them. Not only that, but they manage to bomb the same ethnic Albanians they supposedly protect. Results: Milosevic which oviously presented a serious threat to NATO (yes, sarcasm as usual) is tried for war crimes. Serbians withdray from Kosovo, Albanians start killing Serbians and from to time shoot down NATO peacekeepers. Even more hatred between Albanians and Serbians. Great&#33;


So... I could present more examples, such as the US backed war between Iraq and Iran that tooks millions of lives. But I&#39;m not sure they&#39;re really needed. My point? USA should stay out of local conflicts, as they obviously don&#39;t end better without its involvement for both parties invovled. And not only that, but the entire so-called Western block gains new enemies. Do you think if I go to Serbia and will say that I am Canadian and not American people will love me more? I kind of doubt it...

[Dennis S.]

P.S. Damn, that movie is really impressive... I wonder how much it costs to operate one of those things tho, anyone knows anything about it?

[firefly]

You are still thinking of them in local terms. Vietnam, Afghanistan, nor Korea were local wars. If you look at it from a worldwide view as to all that was happening, it was actually a battle of China/USSR vs the US.
Are we better than these countries morally? No
To put it simply China and Russia supplied the "war machine" for both North Korea and Vietnam to attack their counterparts. The same as the US gave weaponry and combat training to Iranians, such that they would defeat Iraq and make them into a more "US-friendly" governed nation. Dont think these were just local battles. Just because you pay someone else to kill your wife, doesnt mean you arent guilty of the murder.

[Dennis S.]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Firefly @ Dec. 16 2002,14:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You are still thinking of them in local terms. Â*Vietnam, Afghanistan, nor Korea were local wars. Â*If you look at it from a worldwide view as to all that was happening, it was actually a battle of China/USSR vs the US.
Are we better than these countries morally? No
To put it simply China and Russia supplied the "war machine" for both North Korea and Vietnam to attack their counterparts. Â*The same as the US gave weaponry and combat training to Iranians, such that they would defeat Iraq and make them into a more "US-friendly" governed nation. Â*Dont think these were just local battles. Â*Just because you pay someone else to kill your wife, doesnt mean you arent guilty of the murder.[/b][/quote]
Thing is, even if you compare to USA to Soviet Union - Soviet Union only supplies weapons to VCs and North Koreans, but didn&#39;t get involved in the war itself... And I don&#39;t see South Korea or Vietnam hating Russia now for supplying weapons http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Bucky]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dennis S. @ Dec. 16 2002,21:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Firefly @ Dec. 16 2002,14:29)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You are still thinking of them in local terms. Â*Vietnam, Afghanistan, nor Korea were local wars. Â*If you look at it from a worldwide view as to all that was happening, it was actually a battle of China/USSR vs the US.
Are we better than these countries morally? No
To put it simply China and Russia supplied the "war machine" for both North Korea and Vietnam to attack their counterparts. Â*The same as the US gave weaponry and combat training to Iranians, such that they would defeat Iraq and make them into a more "US-friendly" governed nation. Â*Dont think these were just local battles. Â*Just because you pay someone else to kill your wife, doesnt mean you arent guilty of the murder.[/b][/quote]
Thing is, even if you compare to USA to Soviet Union - Soviet Union only supplies weapons to VCs and North Koreans, but didn&#39;t get involved in the war itself... And I don&#39;t see South Korea or Vietnam hating Russia now for supplying weapons http://www.gamershell.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/b][/quote]
Don&#39;t kid yourself. Soviet pilots faced off against US pilots over Korea. Historical fact.

The USSR, as far as I know, wasn&#39;t directly involved in Vietnam... but the Chinese were.

I don&#39;t have any evidence to show off about that, but my brother was in Vietnam, and he is convinced that he killed a Chinese soldier there.

I believe him, btw.