N Korea conducts Nuclear test. (1 Viewer)

[rtsk]

N Korea is developing these weapons as a deterrent. Any other country in the world would do the same thing if it was in their situation. If the US and other nations did not continue threatening its existence, it would have no need for these weapons.

No, Kim's regime is developing those weapons. And it's the regime's continued existence they're interested in, not the existence of the country itself or the people within. It's perfectly understandable to want to get rid of that regime - it'd let the people reach their potential.

no, israel is militaristic and has nuclear weapons so why shouldnt NK?

Ooh I just love the widespread militarism argument. Let's see. Israel has been in 4 major wars since 1948, the latest in '73. Wars that they won, all of them. 3 of these wars were started by the countries around them, countries that wanted to obliterate them. Israel has to be militaristic to ensure its very survival. Israel was the first democracy in the region, and is arguably the only proper one there (apart from Lebanon, which isn't seen by Israel as a threat anyway). On the other hand, North Korea is led by a crazy (albeit very intelligent) man who is hell-bent on the survival of his repressive, and, quite frankly, utterly stupid regime. NK is one of the only communist countries (which haven't collapsed) not to have even relaxed its economic marxism in the slightest. The situation there will just get more desperate unless big changes are made.

And the budget figures are a good comparison to make, let's take a look:
North Korea:
Expenditures ~7 billion, 31.3% of GDP
Israel:
~9.5 billion, 7.7% of GDP
South Korea:
21.06 billion, 2.6% of GDP
Australia:
17.84 billion, 2.7% of GDP
USA:
518.1 billion, 4% of GDP
Japan:
44.31 billion, 1% of GDP
China:
81.48 billion, 4.3% of GDP

So, NK's military expenditure as a percentage of GDP is 4 times that of Israel. And about a third of SK absolutely.

And yes, NK is doing this to gain concessions, looking back to the example of pakistan IMO.

There isn't much love lost between Pakistan, China, and India in any combination, but they're very unlikely to go to war.

In fact, the next major conflaguration will likely be in the middle-east IMHO.

No, the reason the US did not invade DPRK decades ago is because it tried decades ago, and failed. That was what the 1950-1953 Korean war was. Obviously, after you lose a war you cannot simply start it again a year later, so they waited until the time was right again. However, during that time, the DPRK strengthened its military to such an extent that the US would "lose" in the same way it lost in Vietnam. That is, it would win in a military sense, but the casualties amassed would force the US to evacuate due to strong public opinion against the war.

They didn't lose to the North Koreans, they lost to the Chinese. And a more significant factor than the US army vs the North Korean army is the South Korean army vs the North Korean army. Back in 1950, the North Koreans had the newest Soviet tanks (among the best in the world), and the South Koreans has essentially nothing. Now, the South Korean army far outclasses the North Korean army, and would win a conventional battle hands-down (ie no WMD use). South Korea doens't want war, and nor does North Korea... plus SK has an achilles heel in the form of the proximity of Seoul to the border - a city of essentially 20 million 20 kilometres from the DMZ. And NK is not comparable to Vietnam, the US is not trying to perpetuate the tyrranical rule of a thoroughly unpopular regime.

 

[sunjet]

No, the DPRK is not a military dictatorship, as Kim Jong-Il is a civilian, he is not a general or a member of the army. Just because it has a large army, or is oriented towards strengthening its military, does not make it a military dictatorship.

practically

 

[rtsk]

Congratulations, you got the point of my post.
My point was that even a highly militaristic nation can have nukes without using them. The highly militaristic nation I was talking about was NK. I then used Israel, another militaristic nation, as an example of a nation that has not used its nukes.

It's an entirely different situation, as I mentioned above. Plus, Israel actually has *nukes*. And I mean almost certainly deuterium/tritium devices as well, and the delivery systems for them. Bombs that can take out cities, bombs thousands of times more powerful than anything NK could manufacture. And I doubt NK could attach them to their missiles - I think they'd settle with hitting Seoul, especially as they appear to have tested a Neutron bomb (if anything)

 

[sunjet]

NORTH Korea told the world it would regard sanctions as a call to war, as South Korea ordered its military to be ready for a nuclear conflict.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20564939-2,00.html

N. Korea: U.S. pressure would be 'declaration of war'

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/11/korea.nuclear.test/index.html

 

[rtsk]

NORTH Korea told the world it would regard sanctions as a call to war, as South Korea ordered its military to be ready for a nuclear conflict.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20564939-2,00.html

N. Korea: U.S. pressure would be 'declaration of war'

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/11/korea.nuclear.test/index.html

Oh that's all talk. And of course South Korea upped its alert level, any sane country would- but then the two Koreas are still officially at war anyway.

 

[sunjet]

Whoever said Japan will gear up seems to be happening, they are getting really worried and they have already stopped imports and immigrants coming into Japan from NK.

 

[sunjet]

Oh that's all talk. And of course South Korea upped its alert level, any sane country would- but then the two Koreas are still officially at war anyway.

Yeah, I agree it's just for the sanctions to be removed but still..

 

[Aryanbeauty]

No, the reason the US did not invade DPRK decades ago is because it tried decades ago, and failed. That was what the 1950-1953 Korean war was. Obviously, after you lose a war you cannot simply start it again a year later, so they waited until the time was right again. However, during that time, the DPRK strengthened its military to such an extent that the US would "lose" in the same way it lost in Vietnam. That is, it would win in a military sense, but the casualties amassed would force the US to evacuate due to strong public opinion against the war.

US did not invade North Korea in 1950-1953, it was North Korea who invaded South Korea and UN intervened with US as the principal fighting force to defend South Korea from communist north. The strength of North Korea was not an issue it was China and USSR the US actually feared after the war. If it was not Chinese communist volunteers North Korea will not exist today.

And for your information neither north korea nor the US lose the korean war, they were and are still in stalemate along 38th parallel latitude.

I think NK have struck good chord here, they now have some negotiation power, economic sanctions will prove useless if NK threatens to nuke any country nearby.

How do they use their negotiation power if the US refuse bilateral negotiation? This nuclear test shows the desperateness of North Korea in trying to negotiate with US. North Korea already issued threat and we will see in the next few days how the UN react. The country is already crippled by US sanctions alone and if South Korea , japan and even EU followed suit they have nothing else but starve. The minute they launch their nuclear bomb against its neighbour is the day North Korea cease to exist as a nation. I do not think they are dumb enough to commit mass suicide yet, Kim Jong Il loves luxury life too much, why should he prefer to die while he can live and enjoy at the expense of 22 million starving people

 

[marwanjamiel]

No, Kim's regime is developing those weapons. And it's the regime's continued existence they're interested in, not the existence of the country itself or the people within. It's perfectly understandable to want to get rid of that regime - it'd let the people reach their potential.



Ooh I just love the widespread militarism argument. Let's see. Israel has been in 4 major wars since 1948, the latest in '73. Wars that they won, all of them. 3 of these wars were started by the countries around them, countries that wanted to obliterate them. Israel has to be militaristic to ensure its very survival. Israel was the first democracy in the region, and is arguably the only proper one there (apart from Lebanon, which isn't seen by Israel as a threat anyway). On the other hand, North Korea is led by a crazy (albeit very intelligent) man who is hell-bent on the survival of his repressive, and, quite frankly, utterly stupid regime. NK is one of the only communist countries (which haven't collapsed) not to have even relaxed its economic marxism in the slightest. The situation there will just get more desperate unless big changes are made.

And the budget figures are a good comparison to make, let's take a look:
North Korea:
Expenditures ~7 billion, 31.3% of GDP
Israel:
~9.5 billion, 7.7% of GDP
South Korea:
21.06 billion, 2.6% of GDP
Australia:
17.84 billion, 2.7% of GDP
USA:
518.1 billion, 4% of GDP
Japan:
44.31 billion, 1% of GDP
China:
81.48 billion, 4.3% of GDP

So, NK's military expenditure as a percentage of GDP is 4 times that of Israel. And about a third of SK absolutely.

And yes, NK is doing this to gain concessions, looking back to the example of pakistan IMO.

There isn't much love lost between Pakistan, China, and India in any combination, but they're very unlikely to go to war.

In fact, the next major conflaguration will likely be in the middle-east IMHO.



They didn't lose to the North Koreans, they lost to the Chinese. And a more significant factor than the US army vs the North Korean army is the South Korean army vs the North Korean army. Back in 1950, the North Koreans had the newest Soviet tanks (among the best in the world), and the South Koreans has essentially nothing. Now, the South Korean army far outclasses the North Korean army, and would win a conventional battle hands-down (ie no WMD use). South Korea doens't want war, and nor does North Korea... plus SK has an achilles heel in the form of the proximity of Seoul to the border - a city of essentially 20 million 20 kilometres from the DMZ. And NK is not comparable to Vietnam, the US is not trying to perpetuate the tyrranical rule of a thoroughly unpopular regime.

The existence of North Korea is depedent on the existence of the Communist regime. That is the point of NK.

I do not see how Israel winning 4 wars make its a "good guy". Iraq (my country) won the war against Kuwait, but you don't see anyone trumpetting the heroism of the Iraqi army.

North Korea has higher military expenditure by GDP because it is an underdeveloped country, but still requires a military capable of fending off the US Army. Like Israel, it is surrounded by its enemies and must fight for its survival, however you don't see everyone weeping sympathy for it. However, if you look at military expenditure per capita, then it is Israel which is 4 times as militaristic as North Korea.



In 1950, China had just come out of a decades long civil war that had destroyed it as a nation, so its army was inherently weak, it could not have simply been the deciding factor in a war against the US, especially considering that Chinas army is still only one third the strength of the US army.

The reasons for the war in Vietnam played a very small part in the reason for withdrawal. The reason was the 60 000 dead US soldiers. Even in Iraq (my nation of birth and origin), where only 3000 soldiers have died, for a regime that is winning elections (even though I'm against it), democrats and moderate republicans are asking for the withdrawal of US forces. In a war against NKs army, while it is inferior, NK will deal enough blows to make US public opinion turn against the war.

You just admitted that both South Korea and North Korea don't want war, that is my entire point...

practically

What can I say? You did not even state how it is practically a military dictatorship. This is a very black and white issue, a nation is either a military dictatorship or it is not. If the power does not reside in the military, then it is not a military dictatorship. The power in NK rests in the Korean Workers Party and its head, Kim Jong-Il. Since he is not a member of the army, NK isn't a military dictatorship.

It's an entirely different situation, as I mentioned above. Plus, Israel actually has *nukes*. And I mean almost certainly deuterium/tritium devices as well, and the delivery systems for them. Bombs that can take out cities, bombs thousands of times more powerful than anything NK could manufacture. And I doubt NK could attach them to their missiles - I think they'd settle with hitting Seoul, especially as they appear to have tested a Neutron bomb (if anything)

That explains why Arab nations wish to wipe it off the map. What other reason would Israel have those bombs other than to bomb Arabs? Now tell me, why did you make an entirely new post, where the only content of the post is to ecstatically flaunt Israels awesome weapons, which has nothing to do with North Korea?

US did not invade North Korea in 1950-1953, it was North Korea who invaded South Korea and UN intervened with US as the principal fighting force to defend South Korea from communist north. The strength of North Korea was not an issue it was China and USSR the US actually feared after the war. If it was not Chinese communist volunteers North Korea will not exist today.

And for your information neither north korea nor the US lose the korean war, they were and are still in stalemate along 38th parallel latitude.

I think NK have struck good chord here, they now have some negotiation power, economic sanctions will prove useless if NK threatens to nuke any country nearby.

How do they use their negotiation power if the US refuse bilateral negotiation? This nuclear test shows the desperateness of North Korea in trying to negotiate with US. North Korea already issued threat and we will see in the next few days how the UN react. The country is already crippled by US sanctions alone and if South Korea , japan and even EU followed suit they have nothing else but starve. The minute they launch their nuclear bomb against its neighbour is the day North Korea cease to exist as a nation. I do not think they are dumb enough to commit mass suicide yet, Kim Jong Il loves luxury life too much, why should he prefer to die while he can live and enjoy at the expense of 22 million starving people

That is correct, NK invaded South Korea. However, I was simply proving that the US is not simply trying to wait for NK to wither away, that is has tried to confront NK and it failed.

China had just come out of civil war a year earlier, after their entire nation had been picked to the bone. China has hardly in the position to have a mighty military capable of withstanding the US. What may be a more correct analogy of the Korean war was that North Korea was logistically supported by China and the USSR, when it came to weapons, hardware, and their deployment.

Yes, the Korean war was a stalemate, however, if the objective was to destroy the North Korean state, then it failed. My point was that the US cannot simply destroy North Korea.

This will get the US to enter bilateral negotiations, that is how it will help. Welcome to the 21st Century, here politics works in a way where you win wars and develop you army in order to get a better position at the peace table. That is what war is about now, being in a better position at future talks. The US will now have to enter bilateral negotiations, as it must quickly defuse this situation.

The situation of famine in the DPRK is quite exaggerated. the Life expectancy is 71.65 years, up in the range of developed countries, and not much lower than South Koreas 77.04 years. Tell me, if the situation of famine was so bad that everyone was starving, why is it that the DPRK has a life expectancy only 6 years lower than its affluent neighbour?

 

[Calculon]

Congratulations, you got the point of my post.

My point was that even a highly militaristic nation can have nukes without using them. The highly militaristic nation I was talking about was NK. I then used Israel, another militaristic nation, as an example of a nation that has not used its nukes.

There is a difference with Israel though, being that the region hates it because it exists, rather than because of militaristic policy.

EDIT: Also just quickly on the prospect of war between the US/Sth Korea and the North, while China talks tough and says they wouldn't tolerate an invasion of North Korea, if push came to shove and an invasion was mounted which was heavily backed by the US for legitimate reasons, I doubt China would do much to stop it, because it's in neither the US or China's interest to become mortal enemies as China likes the US' money too much, and the US doesn't want to be left out of the Asian economic boom.

In short China would be pissed, but imo wouldn't do anything.

 

[cheesman]

id prefer a country like israel having nukes than one like NK.
its so corrupt and its such a scumhole really
if the govt. cant properly manage its own people, how can it be trusted to be responsible when it comes to nukes?
. sure they can have the right i guess , but i dont think that a country like that deserves to.

 

[Calculon]

The situation of famine in the DPRK is quite exaggerated. the Life expectancy is 71.65 years, up in the range of developed countries, and not much lower than South Koreas 77.04 years. Tell me, if the situation of famine was so bad that everyone was starving, why is it that the DPRK has a life expectancy only 6 years lower than its affluent neighbour?

I must congratulate NK for having a life expectancy only slightly better than a warzone.

 

[HotShot]

id prefer a country like israel having nukes than one like NK.
its so corrupt and its such a scumhole really
if the govt. cant properly manage its own people, how can it be trusted to be responsible when it comes to nukes?
. sure they can have the right i guess , but i dont think that a country like that deserves to.

yes israel, any country that possess nuclear weapons are a danger. Israel could barely manage themselves against hezbollah - basically wiping the whole of south lebanon and still hitting their target.

but anyway. the mainreason that countries produce nukes is the classic reason givin by americans and israelis - "self-defence" which basically means that they wont use the nukes unless attack intentionally by another country. this is somewhat like the alliance held in WWI and WWII, like for belgium had a treaty with england and france - at the time the superpowers - in essence this pretty much like owning a nuclear weapon belgium was invaded and thus nuclear bomb was launched.

the only way out of this is every nuclear nation disarmed all of their nukes.. but no will do this until america does it first - because no one trusts america - lol.

 

[Aryanbeauty]

The existence of North Korea is depedent on the existence of the Communist regime. That is the point of NK.

I do not see how Israel winning 4 wars make its a "good guy". Iraq (my country) won the war against Kuwait, but you don't see anyone trumpetting the heroism of the Iraqi army.

North Korea has higher military expenditure by GDP because it is an underdeveloped country, but still requires a military capable of fending off the US Army. Like Israel, it is surrounded by its enemies and must fight for its survival, however you don't see everyone weeping sympathy for it. However, if you look at military expenditure per capita, then it is Israel which is 4 times as militaristic as North Korea.



In 1950, China had just come out of a decades long civil war that had destroyed it as a nation, so its army was inherently weak, it could not have simply been the deciding factor in a war against the US, especially considering that Chinas army is still only one third the strength of the US army.

The reasons for the war in Vietnam played a very small part in the reason for withdrawal. The reason was the 60 000 dead US soldiers. Even in Iraq (my nation of birth and origin), where only 3000 soldiers have died, for a regime that is winning elections (even though I'm against it), democrats and moderate republicans are asking for the withdrawal of US forces. In a war against NKs army, while it is inferior, NK will deal enough blows to make US public opinion turn against the war.

You just admitted that both South Korea and North Korea don't want war, that is my entire point...



What can I say? You did not even state how it is practically a military dictatorship. This is a very black and white issue, a nation is either a military dictatorship or it is not. If the power does not reside in the military, then it is not a military dictatorship. The power in NK rests in the Korean Workers Party and its head, Kim Jong-Il. Since he is not a member of the army, NK isn't a military dictatorship.



That explains why Arab nations wish to wipe it off the map. What other reason would Israel have those bombs other than to bomb Arabs? Now tell me, why did you make an entirely new post, where the only content of the post is to ecstatically flaunt Israels awesome weapons, which has nothing to do with North Korea?



That is correct, NK invaded South Korea. However, I was simply proving that the US is not simply trying to wait for NK to wither away, that is has tried to confront NK and it failed.

China had just come out of civil war a year earlier, after their entire nation had been picked to the bone. China has hardly in the position to have a mighty military capable of withstanding the US. What may be a more correct analogy of the Korean war was that North Korea was logistically supported by China and the USSR, when it came to weapons, hardware, and their deployment.

Yes, the Korean war was a stalemate, however, if the objective was to destroy the North Korean state, then it failed. My point was that the US cannot simply destroy North Korea.

This will get the US to enter bilateral negotiations, that is how it will help. Welcome to the 21st Century, here politics works in a way where you win wars and develop you army in order to get a better position at the peace table. That is what war is about now, being in a better position at future talks. The US will now have to enter bilateral negotiations, as it must quickly defuse this situation.

The situation of famine in the DPRK is quite exaggerated. the Life expectancy is 71.65 years, up in the range of developed countries, and not much lower than South Koreas 77.04 years. Tell me, if the situation of famine was so bad that everyone was starving, why is it that the DPRK has a life expectancy only 6 years lower than its affluent neighbour?

North Korea is not surrounded by Enemy, the only enemy that borders north korea is South Korea. Two others are its only friends China and Russia and it is not fighting for its survival, in fact it had not fought any wars since korean war except isolated naval clashes with south Korean navy and along the demilitarized zone.

China was the only reason North Korea was able to fought back UN troops, they were already pushed back to Chinese border, only after China sent its volunteers and troops in millions that they were able to push back UN troops to 38th Parallel, otherwise North Korea lacked everything, men, money weapons and food supplies. The biggest military casualties in Korean war were Chinese soldiers, 600,000 were killed compared to 400,000 North korean troops and only 36,000 US troops.( Britannica)

North Korea and Vietnam are not the same, North Korea does not have tropical jungle like vietnam and it is much suited to American troops and weapons for warfare. The reason america did not attack north Korea is not about casualty it is about China. As China did in the korean war, it will not sit idle if its ally is attacked by United States. However, as North Korea defied China the situation has changed a bit and China may no longer protect North Korea especially if North Korea start the war first. United States will not negotiate no matter how desperate North Koreans are , not at least under the current Administration, unless North Korea renounce all its nuclear programme first which is unlikely. So the US is just waiting North Korea to rot from inside.

During 1990's up to 2 million North Koreans died of starvation, probably not bad enough compared to iraq! http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9808/19/nkorea.famine/

 

[marwanjamiel]

North Korea is not surrounded by Enemy, the only enemy that borders north korea is South Korea. Two others are its only friends China and Russia and it is not fighting for its survival, in fact it had not fought any wars since korean war except isolated naval clashes with south Korean navy and along the demilitarized zone.

China was the only reason North Korea was able to fought back UN troops, they were already pushed back to Chinese border, only after China sent its volunteers and troops in millions that they were able to push back UN troops to 38th Parallel, otherwise North Korea lacked everything, men, money weapons and food supplies. The biggest military casualties in Korean war were Chinese soldiers, 600,000 were killed compared to 400,000 North korean troops and only 36,000 US troops.( Britannica)

North Korea and Vietnam are not the same, North Korea does not have tropical jungle like vietnam and it is much suited to American troops and weapons for warfare. The reason america did not attack north Korea is not about casualty it is about China. As China did in the korean war, it will not sit idle if its ally is attacked by United States. However, as North Korea defied China the situation has changed a bit and China may no longer protect North Korea especially if North Korea start the war first. United States will not negotiate no matter how desperate North Koreans are , not at least under the current Administration, unless North Korea renounce all its nuclear programme first which is unlikely. So the US is just waiting North Korea to rot from inside.

During 1990's up to 2 million North Koreans died of starvation, probably not bad enough compared to iraq! http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9808/19/nkorea.famine/

North Korea is not on friendly terms with Russia. The only nation that it is on favourable terms with is China. NK has very bad relations with both SK and Japan, as well as the US, and considering the US is everywhere...

That famine cannot be proven, it is believed, obviously the people who leaked it were the Western governments. North Korea denies that it even happened, and since any information from North Korea is unreliable, the existence of such a famine is ambiguous to say the least.

yes israel, any country that possess nuclear weapons are a danger. Israel could barely manage themselves against hezbollah - basically wiping the whole of south lebanon and still hitting their target.

but anyway. the mainreason that countries produce nukes is the classic reason givin by americans and israelis - "self-defence" which basically means that they wont use the nukes unless attack intentionally by another country. this is somewhat like the alliance held in WWI and WWII, like for belgium had a treaty with england and france - at the time the superpowers - in essence this pretty much like owning a nuclear weapon belgium was invaded and thus nuclear bomb was launched.

the only way out of this is every nuclear nation disarmed all of their nukes.. but no will do this until america does it first - because no one trusts america - lol.

I agree with your view, however the West is never going to disarm from nuclear weapons, those weapons are what allow them to pretend like they own the world (eg by dictating the foreign policy of other nations). I believe in a world where everyone has nukes, or no one has nukes.

There is a difference with Israel though, being that the region hates it because it exists, rather than because of militaristic policy.

EDIT: Also just quickly on the prospect of war between the US/Sth Korea and the North, while China talks tough and says they wouldn't tolerate an invasion of North Korea, if push came to shove and an invasion was mounted which was heavily backed by the US for legitimate reasons, I doubt China would do much to stop it, because it's in neither the US or China's interest to become mortal enemies as China likes the US' money too much, and the US doesn't want to be left out of the Asian economic boom.

In short China would be pissed, but imo wouldn't do anything.

The reason Arabs hate Israels existence is because it is an ethnocentric nation created without the consultation of the people who actually LIVED on the land. Zionism was an ideology that was focussed on "a land without a people, for a people without a land". Either Zionists were blind, or they did not regard Palestinians as people.

id prefer a country like israel having nukes than one like NK.
its so corrupt and its such a scumhole really
if the govt. cant properly manage its own people, how can it be trusted to be responsible when it comes to nukes?
. sure they can have the right i guess , but i dont think that a country like that deserves to.

Obviously you do not come from the Middle East. If you lived in a city like Baghdad (where my family comes from), would you want Israel to have nukes? Israel has shown it will not hesitate to excerise its military. Israel only manages its "own" people, ie only its Jewish residents. You may be unaware that in the West Bank and Gaza, Arabs and settlers have different licence plates, and there are different roads for Arabs and Jews. Israel builds a settlement of 600 settlers near Palestinian towns, taking the best land of course and the IDF has the right to close down Palestinian markets in those towns "for security reasons", even though the money from those markets is what keeps many Palestinians from starving to death. Does a country like that deserve to have nukes? If it does, then North Korea deserves them as well.

I must congratulate NK for having a life expectancy only slightly better than a warzone.

Those figures are estimates, not calculations. The estimates for the number dead in Iraq range from 30 000-655 000, and since the US has power in Iraq, it would have used the lower number for the life expectancy.

A more appropriate warzone would have been Sierra Leone, https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sl.html, 40.22 years.

 

[z600]

Dont forget Iran guys

 

[Aznpsycho]

When the glorious revolution comes, I'll be laughing at you fools while you toil within the re-education camps.

 

[Comrade nathan]

Dont forget Iran guys

Don't forgot your father hates you.

 

[Aryanbeauty]

North Korea is not on friendly terms with Russia. The only nation that it is on favourable terms with is China. NK has very bad relations with both SK and Japan, as well as the US, and considering the US is everywhere...

I don't know where you got this impression that North Korea in not on friendly terms with Russia. If you have any source please provide us.

North Korea has maintained close relations with the People's Republic of China and Russia, but the fall of communism in eastern Europe in 1989 and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 resulted in a significant drop in communist aid to North Korea from Russia, although China continues to provide substantial assistance. (Wikipedia) Of course North Korea is not as reliant on Russia as it did on China, it is the only country visited by Kim Jong Il and the only country that support north Korea apart from China. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2204146.stm


That famine cannot be proven, it is believed, obviously the people who leaked it were the Western governments. North Korea denies that it even happened, and since any information from North Korea is unreliable, the existence of such a famine is ambiguous to say the least.

Cannot be proven? There are millions of North Korean refugees in China as well as many parts of Asia and South Korea, their accounts are taken and there are hundreds of Aid agencies providing food to North Koreans for the past decades and also Journalists from such news agencies as AP, AFP and Reuters. Their accounts are reliable if not where are your source that it is not reliable or is it just your own opinion? Who should we believe people working on the ground in North Korea or someone who sit in the suburb of Sydney claiming North Korea is just fine, people are rich and healthy and live a happy long life?

North Korean leaders tells its people their country is the best and they are the richest in the world and they are living in utopian society. Apparently a watery rice soup and few slice of cabbage is the staple food in utopian world. They are in denial of all the bad things happening to the country and the people so that they can cling on to power just like Hizbollah who denied their fighters were killed in its war with israel so that they can cling on to power and public support.

I agree with your view, however the West is never going to disarm from nuclear weapons, those weapons are what allow them to pretend like they own the world (eg by dictating the foreign policy of other nations). I believe in a world where everyone has nukes, or no one has nukes.

Well I believe in God, USA and Israel.

The reason Arabs hate Israels existence is because it is an ethnocentric nation created without the consultation of the people who actually LIVED on the land. Zionism was an ideology that was focussed on "a land without a people, for a people without a land". Either Zionists were blind, or they did not regard Palestinians as people.

It was arab countries who expelled all jews from their country, in 1900 there were 50,000 jews in Iraq, today there are less than 100, now tell me which country is ethno-centric? Israel have 1.3 million arabs today and who is more tolerant?

Obviously you do not come from the Middle East. If you lived in a city like Baghdad (where my family comes from), would you want Israel to have nukes? Israel has shown it will not hesitate to excerise its military. Israel only manages its "own" people, ie only its Jewish residents. You may be unaware that in the West Bank and Gaza, Arabs and settlers have different licence plates, and there are different roads for Arabs and Jews. Israel builds a settlement of 600 settlers near Palestinian towns, taking the best land of course and the IDF has the right to close down Palestinian markets in those towns "for security reasons", even though the money from those markets is what keeps many Palestinians from starving to death. Does a country like that deserve to have nukes? If it does, then North Korea deserves them as well.

It was Iraq who declared war to israel despite having no borders or territorial dispute, and now you cry foul of Israeli attacks on Iraq? You should not declare war in the first place if you dont want to bear the consequence.
Are you aware that arabs living in west bank and Gaza are managed by Palestianian Authority? They are citizens of palestine and not Israel and they should have separate license plate, their license and registrations are done by palestinian. No there are no seperate road for Israeli and arabs, however, the settlement area are accessible only to residents for security reason, that Palestinian come and kill settlers. There are 1.3 million arabs living happily who have all the rights just as every other israeli citizens. Despite all these baseless accusations that Arabs in israel are discriminated, they are very happy and prefer to live in israel instead of any other arab country, why? because they have freedom which is not available anywhere else in the arab countries where a mere criticism of muhammad is death penalty.

If NSW Police have the right to close down Sydney Airport for security reason despite thousands of people wanting to travel on time, Israeli forces have every right to close down palestinian market for security reason. Tell me any single source where palestinian starved to death? if they have money to buy so many guns and ammunitions and israeli flag to burn they must have enough money to buy food instead of guns

Your justifications of North Korean nuclear rights is based on nothing else but hatred of Israel and USA.

 

[marwanjamiel]

I don't know where you got this impression that North Korea in not on friendly terms with Russia. If you have any source please provide us.

North Korea has maintained close relations with the People's Republic of China and Russia, but the fall of communism in eastern Europe in 1989 and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 resulted in a significant drop in communist aid to North Korea from Russia, although China continues to provide substantial assistance. (Wikipedia) Of course North Korea is not as reliant on Russia as it did on China, it is the only country visited by Kim Jong Il and the only country that support north Korea apart from China. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2204146.stm


That famine cannot be proven, it is believed, obviously the people who leaked it were the Western governments. North Korea denies that it even happened, and since any information from North Korea is unreliable, the existence of such a famine is ambiguous to say the least.

Cannot be proven? There are millions of North Korean refugees in China as well as many parts of Asia and South Korea, their accounts are taken and there are hundreds of Aid agencies providing food to North Koreans for the past decades and also Journalists from such news agencies as AP, AFP and Reuters. Their accounts are reliable if not where are your source that it is not reliable or is it just your own opinion? Who should we believe people working on the ground in North Korea or someone who sit in the suburb of Sydney claiming North Korea is just fine, people are rich and healthy and live a happy long life?

North Korean leaders tells its people their country is the best and they are the richest in the world and they are living in utopian society. Apparently a watery rice soup and few slice of cabbage is the staple food in utopian world. They are in denial of all the bad things happening to the country and the people so that they can cling on to power just like Hizbollah who denied their fighters were killed in its war with israel so that they can cling on to power and public support.

I agree with your view, however the West is never going to disarm from nuclear weapons, those weapons are what allow them to pretend like they own the world (eg by dictating the foreign policy of other nations). I believe in a world where everyone has nukes, or no one has nukes.

Well I believe in God, USA and Israel.

The reason Arabs hate Israels existence is because it is an ethnocentric nation created without the consultation of the people who actually LIVED on the land. Zionism was an ideology that was focussed on "a land without a people, for a people without a land". Either Zionists were blind, or they did not regard Palestinians as people.

It was arab countries who expelled all jews from their country, in 1900 there were 50,000 jews in Iraq, today there are less than 100, now tell me which country is ethno-centric? Israel have 1.3 million arabs today and who is more tolerant?

Obviously you do not come from the Middle East. If you lived in a city like Baghdad (where my family comes from), would you want Israel to have nukes? Israel has shown it will not hesitate to excerise its military. Israel only manages its "own" people, ie only its Jewish residents. You may be unaware that in the West Bank and Gaza, Arabs and settlers have different licence plates, and there are different roads for Arabs and Jews. Israel builds a settlement of 600 settlers near Palestinian towns, taking the best land of course and the IDF has the right to close down Palestinian markets in those towns "for security reasons", even though the money from those markets is what keeps many Palestinians from starving to death. Does a country like that deserve to have nukes? If it does, then North Korea deserves them as well.

It was Iraq who declared war to israel despite having no borders or territorial dispute, and now you cry foul of Israeli attacks on Iraq? You should not declare war in the first place if you dont want to bear the consequence.
Are you aware that arabs living in west bank and Gaza are managed by Palestianian Authority? They are citizens of palestine and not Israel and they should have separate license plate, their license and registrations are done by palestinian. No there are no seperate road for Israeli and arabs, however, the settlement area are accessible only to residents for security reason, that Palestinian come and kill settlers. There are 1.3 million arabs living happily who have all the rights just as every other israeli citizens. Despite all these baseless accusations that Arabs in israel are discriminated, they are very happy and prefer to live in israel instead of any other arab country, why? because they have freedom which is not available anywhere else in the arab countries where a mere criticism of muhammad is death penalty.

If NSW Police have the right to close down Sydney Airport for security reason despite thousands of people wanting to travel on time, Israeli forces have every right to close down palestinian market for security reason. Tell me any single source where palestinian starved to death? if they have money to buy so many guns and ammunitions and israeli flag to burn they must have enough money to buy food instead of guns

Your justifications of North Korean nuclear rights is based on nothing else but hatred of Israel and USA.

How many veto weilding nations in the Security Council are currently against applying sanctions on NK? One, China. Thats all I'm going to say regarding NKs foreign relations.

I do not live in Sydney, I live in Canberra, get your facts straight first.

There are not "millions of refugees" from North Korea, hardly any can leave the country. I believe that you are also deviating from the point of my arguement. I never stated that the DPRK government is good, I was simply saying it is demonised in the press, and it does not live up to its bad image, created so that public opinion will sway against its development of nuclear weapons. The source I used to back my claim that the famine was exaggerated was the life expectancy of DPRK citizens according to CIA world factbooks. This also shows that they do live a "long life".

I simply do not care what you believe in.

Iraq did not "expel" the Jews, they left. There are more than 100 living there, because my family knew more than 100 Jews who were happily residing in Iraq. Israel has 1.3 million Arabs because those Arabs WERE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. It was European settlers coming in the masses to fulfil their Zionist dream, without asking the people LIVING on the land, that turned the demographic tide.

So the consequences of declaring war on Israel is getting nuked?

Here is the sentence that shows Israels ethnocentrism. Why is it only the Arabs, but not the Jews that live in the West Bank, that are under the authority of the Palestinian Authority? Settlers are legitamite targets of attacks, as Israel is using civlians in order to "invade" the West Bank. This is outlined by Ehud Olmerts realignment plan, where he plans to annex the areas of the larger settlements.

They are happier to live in Israel because that is where their family has lived for hundreds of years. Not all Palestinians lived in the West Bank and Gaza, many more lived in Israel proper, but were chased out. Ever heard of a small Palestinian village called Tel Abeb?

Critisism of Muhammed will only get you the death penalty in nations like Saudi Arabia. I would like to point out that Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Algeria, Morrocco, all have secular governments. In fact 5% of Iraqis, and 5% of Arabs in general, are Christians, who are free to practice their religion.

Yes, if NSW police had to shutdown Sydney airport for security reasons, they can. But if Lebanons police wanted to shutdown Sydney airport, working because there are a large number of Lebanese in Sydney, well then there is a major difference.

This is a very black and white issue that has been greyed out by Israel, in order to confuse the world allowing it to continue its occupation. Is the West Bank and Gaza under the jurisdiction of Israel, or the PA? If you say both, then it just shows how Israel has figured out a way to control it, without being responsible for it or the people inside. Kind of reminds me of apartheid...

if they have money to buy so many guns and ammunitions and israeli flag to burn they must have enough money to buy food instead of guns

That is working under the assumption that all Palestinians are terrorists, yes?
Your demonisation of Arabs, and in particular Palestinians, is shocking.