"terror"
who really is the "terrorists"
that is all perspective
who really is the "terrorists"
that is all perspective
My comment was very accurate. Did the US smash NK? YES
Does the US have a military presence near NK? YES
I'm not saying NK didn't bring it in themselves. IMHO they started shit and it blew up in their face. And they are still technically at war with SK and won't drop it, so I don't have sympathy for the Kim regime.
However, I still understand wanting to arm themselves, especially considering the US treatment of the Middle East.
I would love to see this happen, but is there really an efficient way to do it. Nice and clean, maybe look like someone outside of the US did it?
US didn't smash NK, they retreated.
Bombing the country so badly that you run out of targets sounds pretty smashed to me.
And the country was obliterated.
By what metric?
The southern coalition had more civilian casualties and retreated from NK.
The description I already provided, where people had to build mud huts cos all buildings and infrastructure was destroyed by US bombing.
By that metric, I'm not surprised they are uneasy with the US military presence on their doorstep.
So knowing that you already stomped them once and being bordered by 2 nuclear capable allies, with a larger military force than the entire U.S. army does nothing to mitigate that?
It was a stalemate due to China's involvement. Can't rely on big brother for ever.
and Russia's. Which has continued for the past 60+ years, not sure why you'd pretend it's going to stop anytime soon.
if you were a dictator & a dipshit like Bill Clinton gave you billions of dollars, would you prefer to feed your people or would you rather divert those monies to develop nukes? North Koreans shrank 6 inches compared to South Koreans in one generation due to malnutrition, & what people who've been able to escape their prison of a nation report that people have to eat grass to survive. This leaves aside the question of whether any communist is rational given the results that farce of a economic system has produced. If that dipshit is rational then George W. Bush was the 2nd coming of Shakespeare
You know they're both still funneling money to the North Korea, right?
Chinese politicians are adding billions to their bank accounts b/c North Koreans can't figure out how to mine the richest reserve of rare minerals in the world under their soil. NK obviously makes money from this, too, but after reading this thread I guess it's totally rational to use the citizenry as slave labor & let them starve while using that money for a nuclear weapons program
Sure. Still not unreasonable for NK to want to be prepared to defend itself if it has to.
if the USA & NK went to war, what do you think the result would be?
Obliteration of NK, China and Russia step in and break it up.
If their leader weren't a homicidal dictator I'd agree. But seeing as he has 2 massive military allies and is entirely responsible for his current situation, no. It's not reasonable for him to "be prepared to defend himself"
It's laughable that anyone's pretending China and Russia aren't pulling the strings.
so would it be unreasonable to use almost all the available money a country, NK, has to defend itself against a country that'd easily wipe it out, USA, in any situation while the citizens of that country starve?
The goal of the NK regime is to survive and maintain its rule, not to deliver prosperity for its people. The latter would in fact undermine the former.
So to answer your question, if I were a North Korean dictator who wants to remain North Korean dictator and a dipshit gave me billions of dollars, yes, I would spend it on nukes and not feed my people.
OK, can you name some other countries with such perverse incentives for its leaders? If you assume the USA would obliterate North Korea if it chose to, would it be rational to provoke it?