Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Serious Discussion -> North Korea what to do with their weapons?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-29 at 22:32:15
QUOTE(BlackerWinter @ Oct 29 2006, 08:29 PM)
Because we (the US) don’t threaten to wipe an entire culture off the face of the earth. These sick fascist countries
[right][snapback]580744[/snapback][/right]


Isn't that why we (the US) are at war with the Iraq?

Oh wait, you're right, it's differant, because we didn't threaten to do it, we said we wouldn't, and then went ahead and did it, without threatening to.

closedeyes.gif closedeyes.gif


QUOTE(BlackerWinter @ Oct 29 2006, 08:29 PM)
Irrational leaders with those weapons will make irrational decisions with them[right][snapback]580744[/snapback][/right]

Then maybe we should be worrying about our current leader's mental state.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-29 at 23:09:57
Since I was on SEN today anyway I might as well make a post.
QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 29 2006, 10:31 PM)
Isn't that why we (the US) are at war with the Iraq?

No.
I'll give you an overview:
Lol Wtc, OMG THEY BLOWN UP WHO DID IT? DA IRQIS DID, OKAY LOL ATTACK. HEY THEY MIGHT HAVE NUKEZ LOL OK, OH MAN LOOK AT ALL THIS OIL LOL JK NEW GOVERNMENT GG NUB.
That's why.

QUOTE
Oh wait, you're right, it's differant, because we didn't threaten to do it, we said we wouldn't, and then went ahead and did it, without threatening to.

Well they did blow up two huge buildings and killed thousands of people. What we've done to NK... nothing.

As for this whole North Korea itself situation. Yeah, North Korea's real frightening, can you spot north korea in this map of the world at night. I'll give you a hint, it's in between the pretty lights:
user posted image
You know what that means? No electricty, no fresh water, no food plants, no heating, no cooling, no any kind of preservation that's past the 1800s technology, and most importantly no oil. If we went to war with Korea the ground battles would last 20 minutes before they ran out of ammo or their guns backfired or became unusable. The only thing they got going for them is Nukes, and China and Russia are cutting off food supply to them since they decided to try to make some nukes, good friggin plan moron. Now they don't even have nukes to blow us up, so they'll blow someone else up and we'll blow them up. Now i'm going to attempt to leave this friggin website.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-29 at 23:19:57
Why do you think the Iraqis did any of that? Just because there might be terrorists hiding in Iraq soil doesn't mean "omg lol the iraqs did it lets bomb em!111"

There are probably at least SOME terrorists in every single country in the world, does that mean every single country in the world is a terrorist country? No. Does it mean they should all be bombed? No.

I know it may be hard to understand this, with all the propaganda going around, but Iraq and Al-Quada aren't the same thing.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BlackerWinter on 2006-10-29 at 23:36:45
Did i ever say they were? No, your never going to find a quote from me saying, "Iraq and Al-Quada are one in the same." I acknowledge that they're not, and id love to get an understanding as to where u pulled that one from. I said that these countries who are being led by oppresive dictators such as N. Korea need to be kept from inriching Plutonium/Uranium. Its a global security issue. We dont go around waving our nukes in other country's faces, but these deranged indivisuals do. What response are we supposed to have? Peace love and happiness? Absolutly not, they're already showing a lack of understanding their place in the food chain by challenging the US, or Israel for that matter. But again let me reiterate that comments like,
QUOTE
Then maybe we should be worrying about our current leader's mental state.
are coming from people who thought that Clinton's bright idea to pull appx. 80 billion dollars out of our millitary be it in body armor, or supplies to troops or just troops altogether, was a good idea. Keep in mind, it was not Bush who got us into this, it was our infamous ex-president who softened the soil on which we stood.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-10-30 at 00:09:52
I don't think you can blame Clinton for the war in Iraq. Clinton strengthened US-World relations. He never gave terrorists a reason to attack the West.

Bush, on the other hand, has pissed off every country and every group in the world to some extent. That's quite an achievement. Granted, a lot of this happened after 9/11, but in our cheerful new-millenium society, did any of us expect anything like 9/11?

I'm pretty sure Clinton didn't.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EcHo on 2006-10-30 at 00:12:35
How did Clinton even get involved in this? He didnt even hurt the relationship with the Middle East. Like captainwill typed, he only strengthened it.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 00:18:25
QUOTE(BlackerWinter @ Oct 29 2006, 09:36 PM)
stuff
[right][snapback]580758[/snapback][/right]

I was replying to golden fist, not you..

Anyways.

While america has nukes, noone seems to care.

But now korea has nukes to. Everyone panics. Why?

Edit: omg typos.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-30 at 00:24:11
QUOTE
We dont go around waving our nukes in other country's faces


Excuse me?

What do you call you lovely Condie's "we'll nuke you if you nuke somebody" statement.

US nuclear policy from Truman to Raegan to Bush has been "we're gonna nuke your brains out if you nuke us".
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BlackerWinter on 2006-10-30 at 13:28:48
Well Battlekruser, if you were president (don't get too carried away with that one) what would your vocal response be to a country with nuclear weaponry, who threatened to launch at us? Or better yet, DID launch at us and it was en-route.

I would assume that your #1 priority would be take down the nuke that was in the air, but then what?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-30 at 16:19:53
I hate this website.
QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 29 2006, 11:19 PM)
Why do you think the Iraqis did any of that?

Because they hate us. Also let's just point out the contradiction that you say "Why did the Iraqis" do that. Meaning all of Iraq and then you critize me because you assume I said that Iraqi and Terrorist is the same word.
QUOTE
Just because there might be terrorists hiding in Iraq soil doesn't mean "omg lol the iraqs did it lets bomb em!111"

Yeah because I said that.
QUOTE
There are probably at least SOME terrorists in every single country in the world, does that mean every single country in the world is a terrorist country? No. Does it mean they should all be bombed? No.

We didn't take a big nuke and bomb Iraq in case you didn't hear. We bombed caves and locations where it was almost 100% terrorist zone. And if we were just going to bomb iraq, we wouldn't be sending troops, we'd be sending planes.
QUOTE
I know it may be hard to understand this, with all the propaganda going around, but Iraq and Al-Quada aren't the same thing.[right][snapback]580757[/snapback][/right]

Yeah the idea is mind blowing to me.
QUOTE
What do you call you lovely Condie's "we'll nuke you if you nuke somebody" statement.

US nuclear policy from Truman to Raegan to Bush has been "we're gonna nuke your brains out if you nuke us".

Just to put this out there. That's to strike fear into everyone's minds. If our motto was "Hey if you nuke someone, well that' just fine with us!" Then there would be no hesitation to launch one. If they know 100% that if they dare even get near the button that launchs the nuke, that they'll be killing millions of their own people, they'd reconsider their decison don't you think? We don't blow people up for fun those statements are so no one even thinks about using the weapons. That's why the weapons techonology always has to grow. Because if someone makes some new techonology before us, and hates us. What do you think will happen?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 17:55:15
QUOTE(Golden-Fist @ Oct 30 2006, 02:19 PM)
That's to strike fear into everyone's minds.
[right][snapback]580972[/snapback][/right]


In otherwords..


QUOTE(Golden-Fist @ Oct 30 2006, 02:19 PM)
Because if someone makes some new techonology before us, and hates us. What do you think will happen?
[right][snapback]580972[/snapback][/right]


A lot of countries have stronger weapons/military then Canada yet noone picks a fight with them. Why? Because they don't do things (not many, anyways) that piss off other nations.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-30 at 18:06:32
Only 5 countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons in the world. U.S., U.K, France, Russia, and China. And that is why U.S. may have nukes ( 5 posts above "Azu" )

Nuclear bombs just strike fear into everyone.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 19:03:38
QUOTE(Lithium @ Oct 30 2006, 04:06 PM)
Only 5 countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons in the world. U.S., U.K, France, Russia, and China. And that is why U.S. may have nukes ( 5 posts above "Azu" )

Nuclear bombs just strike fear into everyone.
[right][snapback]581047[/snapback][/right]



Wow. So north koreans really ARE mad hax0rz. They defy god eh? God says no nukes for koreans, but they haxed GOD. closedeyes.gif


But seriously, what is the omnipotent entity that has created and enforces this rule?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-30 at 21:31:50
QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 30 2006, 05:54 PM)

Scare tactics would be a better word but hey I won't stop you from leaving the country if you want.
QUOTE
A lot of countries have stronger weapons/military then Canada yet noone picks a fight with them. Why? Because they don't do things (not many, anyways) that piss off other nations.[right][snapback]581036[/snapback][/right]

What does that have to do with anything. I haven't heard of any breakthroughs in Egypt either and you know now that I think about it, there hasn't been much news generating from Greenland either. What do these places all have in common, oh that's right, they're not world powers. If you want to take over your school you wouldn't beat up the kid that hardly anyone knows goes to the school now would you. Destroy the big people and the little ones will follow. If you want to see that in action, as I remember Pearl Habor was in Hawaii and not La Paz, Mexico. What I was saying was that if some insane maniac comes to power with a new weapon and we don't have anything to threaten him with, what do you think is going to happen.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-10-30 at 21:43:07
QUOTE(BlackerWinter @ Oct 30 2006, 11:28 AM)
Well Battlekruser, if you were president (don't get too carried away with that one) what would your vocal response be to a country with nuclear weaponry, who threatened to launch at us? Or better yet, DID launch at us and it was en-route.

I would assume that your #1 priority would be take down the nuke that was in the air, but then what?
[right][snapback]580917[/snapback][/right]


Naturally, I would seek to eliminate the people that just nuked me.

However, I would actually try to prevent a situation in which my country is despised enough to be nuked in the first place.

QUOTE(Golden-Fist @ Oct 30 2006, 02:19 PM)
Just to put this out there. That's to strike fear into everyone's minds. If our motto was "Hey if you nuke someone, well that' just fine with us!" Then there would be no hesitation to launch one. If they know 100% that if they dare even get near the button that launchs the nuke, that they'll be killing millions of their own people, they'd reconsider their decison don't you think? We don't blow people up for fun those statements are so no one even thinks about using the weapons. That's why the weapons techonology always has to grow. Because if someone makes some new techonology before us, and hates us. What do you think will happen?
[right][snapback]580972[/snapback][/right]


Quite so. I think you would agree that the US "parades around" its nukes.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-30 at 21:44:42
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Oct 30 2006, 09:42 PM)
Quite so.  I think you would agree that the US "parades around" its nukes.[right][snapback]581235[/snapback][/right]

Yeah but it's not like we're trying to win a gun show contest. There's a reason behind the showing of the nukes we have.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 22:04:07
QUOTE(Golden-Fist @ Oct 30 2006, 07:31 PM)
Scare tactics would be a better word but hey I won't stop you from leaving the country if you want.

[right][snapback]581223[/snapback][/right]



Wow.

I show the definition of a word, and that means I want to move to another country?

Anyways, what you described fits that word perfectly.

I don't like terrorism, and that means I want to move to another country and you're expected to stop me.

Wow, just wow.

Thanks for the laughs.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-30 at 22:54:41
That's what we call a joke.

Just out of curiosity what sexual organ occupies the space between your legs? One answer would explain your over reaction.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 22:57:24
Wow, I laughed at the joke you made (even though you probally don't think it was a joke), and that has something to do with sex.
Again, thanks for the laughs.

Starcraft: 10$

A computer to play starcraft: 100$

Laughing at the funny things noobs say: Priceless.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Golden-Fist on 2006-10-30 at 23:10:20
QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 30 2006, 10:57 PM)
Wow, I laughed at the joke you made (even though you probally don't think it was a joke), and that has something to do with sex.
Again, thanks for the laughs.

Starcraft: 10$

A computer to play starcraft: 100$

Laughing at the funny things noobs say: Priceless.[right][snapback]581282[/snapback][/right]

You suck at this.
I've been making fun of people for over a year now on the internet so it's become so easy and natural I do it to myself in the mirror sometimes. You call me a noob? Welcome to the year 2000 because people have been using that since then.
You also didn't get the joke, I was implying that you have a vagina woman. Looks like someone is on their period. I heard there's a new kind of tampon that absorbs 50% more vaginal blood then normal. That's great news for you, it also gets rid of the smell, not that you have any seeing as your 12 years old.

And you don't think the joke I made was a joke? What the f*ck? Apparenlty I'm so dumb I don't even know what kind of sentances i'm typing. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. You seem to be mixing up yourself with someone who is intelligent. I remember why I hate this website oh so much. I proved you wrong, you got mad and tried to make me look like some phsychopath moron. Seems to have back fired, you're the ignorant newbie member who spends his time in serious discussion forum acting like you have any idea what you're doing. Why did you join a Starcraft related fourm if you don't even play the game. Obviously you haven't been playing it that long since you bought it for $10 dollars. Maybe it's because when I was playing it, you were 6. Every day I wow myself with how long I can drag on an insult. So since you seem to be lacking in the IQ department here's a brief overview:


YOU
ARE
RETARDED

kekethnxbai +20% warn for us both.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-30 at 23:34:38
QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 30 2006, 08:57 PM)
Wow, I laughed at the joke you made (even though you probally don't think it was a joke), and that has something to do with sex.
Again, thanks for the laughs.

Starcraft: 10$

A computer to play starcraft: 100$

Laughing at the funny things noobs say: Priceless.
[right][snapback]581282[/snapback][/right]

QUOTE(Golden-Fist @ Oct 30 2006, 09:09 PM)
I was implying that you have a vagina
[right][snapback]581287[/snapback][/right]


Yep..

QUOTE(Azu @ Oct 30 2006, 08:57 PM)
Wow, I laughed at the joke you made (even though you probally don't think it was a joke), and that has something to do with sex.
Again, thanks for the laughs.

Starcraft: 10$

A computer to play starcraft: 100$

Laughing at the funny things noobs say: Priceless.
[right][snapback]581282[/snapback][/right]



In case you really did get confused (Which, going by your posts in this topic, is most likely), not just purposefully pretending not to understand, I mean the first definition of sex as at http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=sex&gwp=13

QUOTE
  1. The property or quality by which organisms are classified as female or male on the basis of their reproductive organs and functions.
  2. Either of the two divisions, designated female and male, of this classification.

Not
QUOTE
Sexual intercourse.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-31 at 01:54:35
Azu about the omnipotent entity... and I still wonder where you got the idea of god. ( Simply put, study more, learn more, read more, and think more before you even click on the serious discussions )
Simply answered "U.N" and its Non-profileration treaty ( and its not a entity, its a nearly omnipotent organization ). There are currently 8 countries who hold nuclear weapons and one that is suspected to have one, and 3 illegally and 2 the world doesnt even care because it sides with the U.S.
(The U.N. Security Council = Legal)
U.S., Russia, China, U.K., France.
(Illegally holding Nukes but the world not caring)
Pakistan and India = Both allied to the U.S. politically
mainly because they gain tons of money by allying with U.S.
(Illegally possessing Nukes and the world is crying about it)
North Korea = OMGZ0R!
(That is suspected)
Israel = Highly supported by the US and has great influence over it. Simply put. 80
% of Americans were made dumb by them. But not the point, it is suspected to have nuclear weapons but it never announced and said "WE HAVE NUKES SO PUT A SANCTION ON US!"
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-31 at 03:17:56
QUOTE(Lithium @ Oct 30 2006, 11:54 PM)
Azu about the omnipotent entity...
[right][snapback]581318[/snapback][/right]

Sorry, that was sarcasm.
Anyways the U.S. ignored the U.N. about Iraq. Korea won't the first to ignore them.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lithium on 2006-10-31 at 06:16:24
That didn't make sense, and it's quite different. U.S. had a few countries supporting the war so it wasn't denying the U.N., it was denying it from some countries.
However, for N.K., ALL countries disapprove of the nuclear weaponary armament. Which is in fact if denied denying the world. U.N.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-10-31 at 15:43:59
Damn. Those koreans hax0rz are denying the world. Let's get out our anti-hax!
Next Page (5)