What the f***

NORTH Korea ... said the "slightest moves" by US and South Korean forces towards a pre-emptive strike would be countered with a "more rapid and powerful advanced pre-emptive strike. ... unimaginably more powerful than nuclear weapons."

It would "not merely turn everything into a sea of fire but reduce everything treacherous and anti-reunification to debris and build an independent reunified country on it."

They either know they have the upper hand or they are getting into the s***.

i think its called wall-e

i suppose all kim jong il would really have to do is annihilate south korea, japan, and the united states

he probably means a zerg rush

So are there anti-nuclear defenses available to the US/UN? like missiles that target nukes mid-flight?

Or are we all f***ed?

Why can't we all just GET ALONG!?

So are there anti-nuclear defenses available to the US/UN? like missiles that target nukes mid-flight?

See: Team America: World Police

last edited by jadz0r at 01:18:58 24/Dec/08

When Bush decided to name North Korea as part of the Axis of Evil that almost sent North Korea to War. Then he follows it up with claiming to have the right ( who gave him that right) to launch Pre-Emptive attacks against a country that was planning an attack and this has made them even more paranoid.
Even if you took Iraq and the War on Terror out of Bush's resume he would still be a bigger failure than Charlie Brown.

Saw a movie on SBS last week about some Gaurds on the heavily fortified borders of Korea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Security_Area_(film)
Great movie.

bush might be a retard but korea saying s*** like that is even more retarded. everyone knows they're full of s***.

So Kim Jong is using the words "unimaginably more powerful than nuclear weapons", against a man who destroyed most of Iraq just LOOKING for nukes?

Seems like N Korea is asking for a fight if you ask me.

last edited by Phooks at 02:04:41 24/Dec/08

suprise cockfags!

Shotgun the northern provinces.
Please don't irradiate the soil too much.

phooks your sig makes me want to go to war, ON YOU.

"slightest moves" by US and South Korean forces towards a pre-emptive strike would be countered with a "more rapid and powerful advanced pre-emptive strike

so a pre-pre-emptive strike? that's easy all the us needs is a pre-pre-pre-emptive strike (sponsored by mbm.livewiredev.com)

last edited by whoop at 02:18:28 24/Dec/08

Forget the Nukes.
North Korea prolly has enough Biological weapons to kill the planet.
In fact i dont think the Earth could deal with a Korean War.

Krudd would prolly want us to pay a Radiation tax.

HEY USA IM TOTALLY GONNA DO SOME TERRIBLE s*** TO U IF YOU KEEP BULLYING ME!!!!! SNIFF!!!!




for real they should just build the sword of Damocles satellite tungsten beam dropping thing and start laying waste to fags like NK. Blow up their stupid unfinished half skyscraper

North Korea has a Deathstar now?

Pfft, just shoot it in the exhaust port.

They're not really that bat-s*** crazy to do it now.
With a planned doubleing of troups in Afganastan their comitment in Iraq.
The fact that they have no money means that they couldn't open another war front even if they wanted to.

Nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

The best way to do it is to help south korea invade north.

Nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

Nuke the catch from phrase, it's the only way to catchphrase.

so ronery

North Korea doesn't have enough weapons to do anything. They don't even have enough food to feed their own people. Just ignore them and they will go away.

they have a huge army, they literally can zerg the south. Might not do much actual damage but do you really want that many people dying for "the great leader" or whatever he calls himself.

North Korea doesn't have enough weapons to do anything. They don't even have enough food to feed their own people. Just ignore them and they will go away.

This strategy has so far failed for most of Africa, and countries like Lebanon, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iran...

they have a huge army, they literally can zerg the south. Might not do much actual damage but do you really want that many people dying for "the great leader" or whatever he calls himself.

Maybe. They can only die once right?

This strategy has so far failed for most of Africa, and countries like Lebanon, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iran...

None of those countries pose a threat to anyone. In fact I dare say that if they were left alone they would become less of a threat instead of this obsession the US has with neo-colonialism.

They are primarily domestic conflicts which hurt their own people, which is sad but not an international threat.

no but point is just because a country is poor doesnt mean they dont have money for war!

North Korea doesn't have enough weapons to do anything. They don't even have enough food to feed their own people. Just ignore them and they will go away.

Replace North Korea with Iraq post 9/11 and the above statement is very applicable, except f***tard bush thought otherwise. Funny that.

no but point is just because a country is poor doesnt mean they dont have money for war!

Exactly. All their money is in war.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/kim_jong_il_interprets_sunrise_as

Replace North Korea with Iraq post 9/11 and the above statement is very applicable, except f***tard bush thought otherwise. Funny that.

Yeah but Iraq has a truckload of oil, and that makes it all worthwhile.

with the amount of conventional weaponry aimed at Seoul I'm inclined to believe it, it may not have enough fuel for its planes, and only 1 rifle per 5 conscripted soldiers, it still has close to 11,000 artillery batteries aimed at South Korea, and some of those are armed with biological tips, North Korea truly doesn't need nukes to take out the South. the scary part is, is that Seoul itself is very close to the border, which makes the idea of a blitzkerg style attack even more likely.

it would be a death wish. they might do some damage to the south but the whole western world would ruin their s*** so badly there wouldn't be a north korea afterwards.

nkorea are probably a bit more rational than that. this is just talk, which the americans will pretend to take seriously as part of the political/diplomatic manouvering that goes on with these kinds of things.

true, it would be a suicide attack, but the end result will still be a devastated South Korea, and a destroyed North Korea. the only hope is for the great leader to keel over and die, when that happens, maybe just maybe there would be hope for peace / unifaction.

The best way to do it is to help south korea invade north.

Nah, they don't want it. It'd go all german reunification for them.

None of those countries pose a threat to anyone.

uh what?

Who cares about Korea? They can't throw rocks far enough to be a threat to us.

us? not directly but they could fire on Japan, Taiwan, or South Korea, either of those would likely result in a war we do not want.

"Economic sanctions on North Korean imports and exports, the reintroduction of cuff links as a fashion accessory, a sudden drop in lower-middle-class spending habits, sporadic changes in the migratory patterns of monarch butterflies, the announcement of yet another new sports drink, a daily rise in the Dow Jones Industrial Average higher than 3.5 points, shorter hemlines, inspections of North Korean cargo in an attempt to intercept weapons or weapons parts, or the release of a new U2 album—any of these actions will be interpreted as an act of war, and force us to take drastic measures to protect our sovereignty," said Kim in a written statement, which also warned that the world's third-largest standing army is prepared to deliver a "merciless blow at a moment's notice" if the leaves begin to turn colors and fall from the trees of North Korea. "Though we desire peace, we have seen the signs of war on the horizon, and we are not afraid to act."

ehh heheh? :/

You should do some research on why North Korea hates America.
America literally FireBombed The 4 largest North Korean cities.
A Holocaust, Hundreds of Thousands died. Civillians.
Macarthur wanted to use Nukes against them and there is some evidence America used 'other' weapons also.

The Japanese did horrific experiments on Korean ppl.
Live vivisections, gassing them and they liked to drop carcasses containing Plague and Poisons onto Towns then study the effects on the ppl of the towns. They would cut them open while they were still alive to see the effects of the poisons/viruses. Without anesthetic. Some were tried by the Soviet Union but most if not the leaders were welcomed by America.
They took these evil doctors back to America to help them with their own research. They also took all the data they had collected.
These ppl made the Nazis look like Angels.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731
If you were a North Korean how badly would you hate Japan ?
And Japans great friend is Amerika.
IF North Korea is ever attacked Japan will be demolished.

South Korea has been party to some terrible actions itself.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/AP_U.S._Okayed_Korean_War_Massacres_0705.html


The whole thing could be sorted out if America left South Korea.
It wont because South Korea is one giant military base facing China.
The country is a basket case but the culture of fear and the threat of American invasion is almost a religious fervor.
One thing is for certain.
Nobody would dare to invade North Korea ever again.

I kind of admire North Korea for standing up to America and at times even China.

I kind of admire North Korea for standing up to America and at times even China.

It's possible to stand up to America and not be a giant douchebag though. Well, I assume it is; Australia can't seem to do it

Nobody would dare to invade North Korea ever again.

it's just rhetoric though. Countries like Iran and North Korea are forcing their citizens to live in abject poverty due to their ongoing grudges. Just like Germany and Japan, they too need to get over themselves and join the global community or the quality of life for the foreseeable future will suffer.

last edited by infi at 16:43:49 24/Dec/08

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x56/maxe1/nkorea21.jpg


woodgrain on the RPG


uunnnggghh, so fly

Just like Germany and Japan, they too need to get over themselves and join the global community or the quality of life for the foreseeable future will suffer.

... but in the meantime, the rest of us should just let them do whatever the hell they feel like, until such point as they try to force their a****** policies on people outside their own country. Revolution should come from within.

There is no indication from anywhere that a pre-emptive strike is even being considered. The only evidence is that this is a totalitarian (not communist) state and the people have absolutely no freedom.

Does this "keep our nose out of it" policy extend to peacekeeping situations like Rwanda, or even public health situations like Zimbabwe, as the population starves and children die of Cholera?

Just like Germany and Japan, they too need to get over themselves and join the global community or the quality of life for the foreseeable future will suffer

What like the New World Order? what are you a f***in freemason?

You know, the global community of countries which recognise universal human rights.

2 things:

1. North Korea is incredibly pov. The poor c***s are starving. Therefore Kim Jong does the old 'sabre rattle' every few yrs so that he can get some $$$. It's not so much a sabre rattle but more like a poor homeless c*** rattling his can so you throw a few dorrahs in.

2. The Yanks won't attack N.Korea until Kim Jong actually invades S.Korea (which they wont. see point #1). Also N.Korea has no oil.

You know, the global community of countries which recognise universal human rights.

you mean like the united states governed by the bush regime, going against the UN and violating international law and as a result killing 50 000 (and counting) innocent iraqi civilians in the name of peace and liberty. Awesome universal human rights man, sign me up for that s*** asap.

last edited by MatchFixer at 01:20:31 25/Dec/08

As compared to those awesome regimes which summarily execute their citizens.

Or those regimes which wage genocide on their own people.

Awesome.

um... i do not condone any regime that executes their own citizens, or any other country's citizens for that matter, yet ruthless murders are being committed on a large scale by the so called 'liberators' and 'peace keepers'. It's mass murder no matter which way you look at it so just what the hell is your point?

last edited by MatchFixer at 01:38:58 25/Dec/08

neither is good.

i would prefer a universal respect of human rights.

Then i wouldn't go praising "The global community of countries" that supposedly 'recognise universal human rights', cause they f***ing don't, and even if they did, they wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

So what is better?

I would prefer governnments that as a principle accept universal human rights to those who do not.

Iraq under Saddam did not accept universal human rights. And that's what you're really getting at here. You're view is that Iraq should not have been liberated. Correct me if I am wrong.

The liberators did incur unnecssary civilian loss and I cannot undertand why they are still there. But my point is individual freedom is a must and governments who do not accept this must be removed.

But my point is individual freedom is a must and governments who do not accept this must be removed.

Why? To make you feel better?

No because it is a universal right of all people. Is that such a difficult concept to comprehend?

You're view is that Iraq should not have been liberated.

I'm all for liberating a country from dictatorship but the fact is iraq has not been liberated and is actually now worse off than how it was under sadam's rule. If by liberation you mean having no water, electricity, gas, getting shot on sight after the 8pm curfew or getting blown up at the shops for simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time then all the countries in the west, on the contrary, must be living under dictatorship and are doing it tough. /sarcasm.

Having said that, what you fail to understand, time and time again, is that the invaders used sadam as an excuse to invade iraq (because of WMD's *apparently*, bad man to his people *apparently* etc..) to justify their invasion and fulfilling their ulterior motive. If america wanted sadam removed they could've done so back in the gulf war. Why wasn't he such a bad man when he used his weapons (supplied by America) when he waged a 7 year war against Iran? or when he gassed the kurds with chemical weapons back in 1988 in which the effects can still be seen on the people today? what makes him such a bad man now and not then? they conned the Iraqi people into the fey sad that is liberation, because all they've known was sadam and didn't know any better and now they're suffering worse than they ever did before.

Your so called liberators are not the good-willed world peace keepers as much as you'd like to think, but then again you don't know any better because you think your way of life is superior and if people don't want it then they must be an uncivilized bunch of terrorists that should cease to exist.


last edited by MatchFixer at 12:12:08 25/Dec/08