N. Korea Vows to Nuke US

[Dubya]

You have to love the liberal logic here: They aren't a threat because they can't send a missle our way yet.

Yea, we should just wait until they finally do get it right and have the capability. THEN we'll start to take them seriously.

I mean really, its not like this country has killed tens of thousands of Americans, or close to a half million South Koreans. So they're not a threat.

What the hell are those ABMs in Alaska for?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You have to love the liberal logic here: They aren't a threat because they can't send a missle our way yet.

Yea, we should just wait until they finally do get it right and have the capability. THEN we'll start to take them seriously.

I mean really, its not like this country has killed tens of thousands of Americans, or close to a half million South Koreans. So they're not a threat.

So is your argument that this communist regime is going to suddenly develop at a pace that they'll someday be a threat to the U.S.?

 

[theHawk]

You have to love the liberal logic here: They aren't a threat because they can't send a missle our way yet.

Yea, we should just wait until they finally do get it right and have the capability. THEN we'll start to take them seriously.

I mean really, its not like this country has killed tens of thousands of Americans, or close to a half million South Koreans. So they're not a threat.

So is your argument that this communist regime is going to suddenly develop at a pace that they'll someday be a threat to the U.S.?

No, that's not my arguement.

 

[Dubya]

You have to love the liberal logic here: They aren't a threat because they can't send a missle our way yet.

Yea, we should just wait until they finally do get it right and have the capability. THEN we'll start to take them seriously.

I mean really, its not like this country has killed tens of thousands of Americans, or close to a half million South Koreans. So they're not a threat.

So is your argument that this communist regime is going to suddenly develop at a pace that they'll someday be a threat to the U.S.?

Hawk claims there is evidence of two rickshaws.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You have to love the liberal logic here: They aren't a threat because they can't send a missle our way yet.

Yea, we should just wait until they finally do get it right and have the capability. THEN we'll start to take them seriously.

I mean really, its not like this country has killed tens of thousands of Americans, or close to a half million South Koreans. So they're not a threat.

So is your argument that this communist regime is going to suddenly develop at a pace that they'll someday be a threat to the U.S.?

No, that's not my arguement.

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

 

[bornright]

He can barely get it up, let alone land the delivery If we jumped every time someone threatened to nuke is we'd be at war with half the planet. As it stands right now, we're in more dnager from domestic terrorists than the North Koreans.

Who else has verbally threatened us with nukes? They have them and the ability to send them somewhere. I am sure Obama will do nothing as it appears you are willing to go along with. Personally I feel we should take any threat serious and let it have serious consequences as I always took serious any threat on me or my family.

 

[Dubya]

He can barely get it up, let alone land the delivery If we jumped every time someone threatened to nuke is we'd be at war with half the planet. As it stands right now, we're in more dnager from domestic terrorists than the North Koreans.

Who else has verbally threatened us with nukes? They have them and the ability to send them somewhere. I am sure Obama will do nothing as it appears you are willing to go along with. Personally I feel we should take any threat serious and let it have serious consequences as I always took serious any threat on me or my family.

That's why you aren't President and neither is the person you voted for.

 

[theHawk]

So is your argument that this communist regime is going to suddenly develop at a pace that they'll someday be a threat to the U.S.?

No, that's not my arguement.

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

 

[Katzndogz]

Do the posters here have any concrete and credible information that North Korea does not have alliances with any other country that they could ally with.

Iran has a military cooperative agreement with Venezuela. Do the democrat posters here have any independent information that North Korea is prohibited from using an Iranian delivery system to launch an attack from Venezuela, not North Korea?

 

[Dubya]

No, that's not my arguement.

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

Our policy is to not get a bunch of people killed by being stupid. I don't think you could follow or understand such a policy.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, that's not my arguement.

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

You mean South Korea and Japan who are also both far more developed than North Korea in their own right, and who are both under the protection of the United States?

Nuclear capability is a development, in and of itself, but it's not necessarily impressive. Without the resources to make that development relevant, as in the case of North Korea, it's not threatening.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Do the posters here have any concrete and credible information that North Korea does not have alliances with any other country that they could ally with.

Iran has a military cooperative agreement with Venezuela. Do the democrat posters here have any independent information that North Korea is prohibited from using an Iranian delivery system to launch an attack from Venezuela, not North Korea?

Are you asking us to prove a negative?

 

[Katzndogz]

No, that's not my arguement.

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

The theory is that China would not let North Korea shit nuclear material in China's backyard.

 

[Dubya]

Do the posters here have any concrete and credible information that North Korea does not have alliances with any other country that they could ally with.

Iran has a military cooperative agreement with Venezuela. Do the democrat posters here have any independent information that North Korea is prohibited from using an Iranian delivery system to launch an attack from Venezuela, not North Korea?

I think North Korea is further along on missile technology than Iran.

 

[Katzndogz]

Do the posters here have any concrete and credible information that North Korea does not have alliances with any other country that they could ally with.

Iran has a military cooperative agreement with Venezuela. Do the democrat posters here have any independent information that North Korea is prohibited from using an Iranian delivery system to launch an attack from Venezuela, not North Korea?

Are you asking us to prove a negative?

Not at all. What leads democrats to believe that North Korea is so powerless when it is obvious that Kim Jong Un has allies? I'm sure that the liberal democrats here have an answer. They already know everything.

 

[theHawk]

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

Our policy is to not get a bunch of people killed by being stupid. I don't think you could follow or understand such a policy.

Translation: Our foreign policy is to stick our head in the ground and not do anything about belligerent nations actively trying to pursue a means to attack the US or our allies.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Do the posters here have any concrete and credible information that North Korea does not have alliances with any other country that they could ally with.

Iran has a military cooperative agreement with Venezuela. Do the democrat posters here have any independent information that North Korea is prohibited from using an Iranian delivery system to launch an attack from Venezuela, not North Korea?

Are you asking us to prove a negative?

Not at all. What leads democrats to believe that North Korea is so powerless when it is obvious that Kim Jong Un has allies? I'm sure that the liberal democrats here have an answer. They already know everything.

You asked "Democrats" to prove that North Korea doesn't have such alliances. That's a negative. For the record, Venezuela and Iran are not threats to the U.S. either, regardless of any alliance between the three of them.

 

[Dubya]

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

Our policy is to not get a bunch of people killed by being stupid. I don't think you could follow or understand such a policy.

Translation: Our foreign policy is to stick our head in the ground and not do anything about belligerent nations actively trying to pursue a means to attack the US or our allies.

Our policy is to recognize that Seoul, South Korea is in artillery range of North Korea and not do stupid things. That idea is totally alien to you.

 

[theHawk]

Well then what is your argument? And doesn't it rely on the assumption that North Korea, a communist regime, is going to develop? Absent market reforms, North Korea can't develop to a point that they're a threat to the U.S. Not in this universe, anyways.

Most people consider a nuclear capability a "developement", evidently you don't.

Also, why do we need to wait for them to be a threat to "the U.S."? All they need to do is be able to strike at Japan, or South Korea. You know, where plenty of US military are located....not to mention the citizens of those countries whose lives are at stake.

You mean South Korea and Japan who are also both far more developed than North Korea in their own right, and who are both under the protection of the United States?

Nuclear capability is a development, in and of itself, but it's not necessarily impressive. Without the resources to make that development relevant, as in the case of North Korea, it's not threatening.

So what if South Korea and Japan are "more developed"? They aren't totalitarian communist regimes that are threatening anybody. And just because they, as well as the US, are more "developed", doesn't mean they wouldn't be susceptible to an attack or that their defenses are absolutely impervious to a nuclear strike.

 

[ima]

Dennis Rodman has everything covered, not to worry.