North Korea test denotates nuclear bomb :(

I fully support research and publication of information that shows misdeeds of the West (that actually includes more countries than the US believe it or not), but the who mock confusion over who is a terrorist or dictator is a bit disingenuous to me.

North Korea has had an estimated 2-3 million people starve in it's country. They do have concentration camps. They've kidnapped people from other countries and forced them to live there to learn about other cultures. They receive food aid and try to make money by charging their people for it. The entire country is held hostage by on man. You can speak of shared blame, but usually it's done to switch the topic onto a party that the speaker personally doesn't like.

Israel? Seeing the difference is easy. If the Arabs and the Jews traded all of their weapons, the Jews would be exterminated. Period. One can live with coexistance and the other can't live without killing the other. And what's with the free pass the Arabs get on using violence and blowing up kids? Are people saying that they are excused from the "diplomacy first" belief? Other coutnries have worked out peace deals with Israel and enjoy the benefits from it. The others that don't are being held hostage by their radical leaders.

"And Tony Blair and Gearge Bush are not terrorists? They raid other people's countries for their own benefits, sounds about the same to me, just different teams. The term terrorist is one made to label the "bad guys", although most forget that there is no bad and good in the world, they re just points of view "

Muslim terrorists machine gunning 350 Russian school kids isn't about a point of view. Killing 3,000 office workers isn't just the work of the "other team." Perhaps the definition of terrorism can be described as the definition of porn from one judge, "I can't describe it but I know it when I see it." US soldiers who murdered a family in Iraq are in trial and will be put in jail. Terrorists in Iraq who kill Iraqi families are celebrated by their peers. There's no perfect language to describe the difference and I think some people try to take advantage of that fact and blur the lines.

We can discuss what needs to change on both sides to make this world a better place, but let's not water down the definition of terrorist and dictator and make them meaningless.

 

Oh, and sorry about the spelling errors...heh

 

You know, living where we are in the modern comforts of western society it's easy to lump things into black and white like that. But on closer examination of the Isralei-Palestine conflict it gets a little hard to tell who exactly are the good guys.

On one side we have a massivley powerful militarized nation, surrounded by enemies, where all members of society are conscripted for military service for a period of at least two years, who have logistical and material support from the one nation on Earth with THE most advanced weaponry ever (us, the United States.) Let's not forget they're the one nation in the area who has atomic weapons.

On the other side we have a people who are nationless, with a skeletal government made up of loose cabinets of constantly shifting alliances, no economy, very little land base in which to establish infrastructure such as schools, hospitals, etc. What infrastructure they do have is constantly being destroyed and rebuilt in these rediculous anitfatas they keep pronouncing. Thier main weapon seems to be to send desperate people into the enemy country to blow themselves up.

These two forces are locked in a land dispute and neither one seems to want to budge when it comes to the bargaining table. One side promises a lot but never delivers (Isreal,) the other side never seems to be satisfied with anything (Palestine.) Both sides break whatever cease fire is on the table to go blow each other up on a regular basis, then both sides pull the victim card when the other side does thier retalitory strike.

How long exactly are we going to involve ourselves with this? Is that part of the world really that strategically important? Well, yes it is - whoever controls that area not only has a presence in the Middle east, but also gains a foothold on central Asia. Truth is we could give a shit about Isreal or Palestine, we are there to nab the resources before they go to the Chinese (but you'll never hear about that on the news, so forget about it.)

We haven't faced the fact that there may be no peaceful solution. One side might just have to kill the other in order to get any type of lasting peace in the region. That's on par with every other conflict in human history; How many times have you read about some war in the acient past that actually came to a peaceful resolution? You haven't, becasue it doesn't work that way. One side always has to kill the other, drive them out, stamp them out of existance, sow their ground with salt, whatever. This one is no different.

If I were President I'd surround both countries with atomic submaries, kidnapp the leaders of both countries, then strand them on a desert Island with no food or water during hurricane season and not let them be rescued until they finally came to a lasting agreement. Maybe I'd throw a man-eating tiger on the island too, you know, make them band together for survival, shit like that.

I should run for office.

 

If you were president, you'd have turned the world into a nuclear wasteland a long time ago, I'm sure.

The whole Israeli/Palestinian mess is the result of bad management and cock-ups made by the UN after WW2 in the allocation of land after the division of Palestine. It will never be resolved peacefully because it depends on the agreement of two completely opposed cultures and religions.

However, we (as an International plural) have an obligation to sort it out. There won't be a compromise, so it must be done by force in a way that is not seen to take sides (the REAL problem). This is unrealistic politically at present because it would rely a large part on agreement and logisitical support from the USA, which considering it's ties with Israel is extremely remote. Bush has taken the step of declaring the right for a Palestinian state though, which is at least a start and something never undertaken by an American president before. You can say all you like about Bush, but he has made some positive changes.

It might be a naive opinion, but a great deal of the tension between Islam and the West could be resolved if inroads could be made to sort out this conflict, instead focusing on the "axis of evil". Once that was achieved perhaps the Islamic states would be more willing to work with the rest of the world on issues of terrorism and disuading countries like Iran from developing their nuclear deterant.

 

Whoa there, stop confusing salt with sugar. Muslim terrorists, Chechens, have nothing to do with the middle-east. Chechen extremists take pride in killing, raping, stealing etc. Any russian knows that, and I happen to have many russian mates who can easily tell you that they have a problem with Chechens, NOT muslims. :thumbsup:

Iraqis celebrate when they kill un-invited guests. Everyone and their dog knows that the US is at fault for the state of Iraq now, and even Sadam was placed by the US. If you were an iraqi and someone pissed, killed, ravenged in your land and wanted to "give you democracy" for the price of some benefits (namely oil and what have you) you would be a very angry man too. There's been at least one generation born under this US-derived regime of both Sadam and the current phase, so its natural for them to hate Americans.

How did the french feel when ze Germans invaded? Didn't they take pride in killin a few Nazis? Sure they did. US are not Nazis of course, but the fact that they want to govern and popped-in uninvited makes them as despised by the local people as the Nazis.

When my country, Greece, was ruled by the Turkish empire for 400 years, even to this day, many many Greeks don't like the Turks for this reason. Ethnic hatred goes a long way when someone occupies your land, and logical or not as it may be, I can't blame them.

Every country deserver their liberty. Not to swap between Sadam and US troops.

I see history repeating at the moment. There's islamofobia. As it happened to the jews during WW2, where they got the blame for everything, now I see muslims as the scape goats of every extreme action and bad in the world. I dont doubt that they do attacks. But why do they do them? They re trying to get even, not start a war. US and Israel, weapon-selling countries both, would on the other hand have quite a benefit in war efforts from no matter who

 

Your russian mates should read up on their true history and how they treated the chechnyans when they invaded and turned it part of the soviet empire. Chechnya was a dominant muslim region before and after Soviet Russia invaded and the groups who do the terrorizing there use Islamic doctrine to justify their tactics. Also, don't forget how badly the russians treated german women and children refugees after WW2, as a revenge for Germany invading.

Every country hates anyone that invades them whether it is a military invasion or a detrimental economic invasion (such as the problem US is having with its illegal immigrants or free-trade opening up in countries in S. America and virtually collapsing the local farmers in the region). Iraqis have every right to hate the US. The only problems their having now are just ethnic issues. Every country in that region has or had ethnic clashes once in their life. Both sides in that country hate the US but they only want one side to control the region. Sunis still want power and are getting support from Syria and Iran. Most of the suni militants US troops kill are from Syria. Shiites want control because they feel they deserve it because Sadam was very oppresive towards. Sadam kept things under control by setting up a wall between both cultures and if the Shiites messed up by 'crossing' that dividing line he punished them severely, but Sunis got away with a lot of things under his regime. The US destroyed that wall and now we have this unorganized violence going on, which is typical when cultures who were previously divided come in contact with each other.

All this fighting simply stems from deep ethnic hatred being passed along generation to generation because of something an old government did when they were in control. But all that hatred does is creates more violence. It was ethnic hatred that started WW1, ultimate conquest by germany is what started WW2. It was also WW2 that the US government realized that if they kept playing the nuetral card (which they did in WW1 and 2) they can be destroyed which could've happened if US didn't help UK and France. That is why you see the US involved in a lot things going on in the world, both humanitarian efforts and military to not only stop another WW2 scenario, but also another WW1.

It is only the radicals in each society that cause terrorism. US has its KKK, Christian fundamentalists, etc. Every country has their irrational-radical group. Those who still hold grudges for things that happened hundreds of years ago and can't let go of it and move on can lead that society/culture to its own destruction.

Islamophobia? Only the ignorant believe it. Only the ignorant fears them or hates everyone of them. It is just a tactic they use to get their way and make it look like the actions they take are justified. That lets them walk all over you.

Overall, no side is right, but no side is wrong as well. Ideology is what justifies your actions even if its fundamentally right or wrong. All the fighting going on now come from cultural difference and economic domination. The old fighting the new and vice-versa. People can believe whatever they want and fight for it. It is just that some people out there believe in something that is fundamentally wrong.

 

I just feel sorry for the N. Korean people. Their country is bringing much more stress to their daily lives. I hope the UN takes this into account before they punish the common folks for the actions of a mentally unbalanced dictator.

 

Barcode...

I understand what you're saying, but I think you're making too many links between terrorists/insurgents and the average Joe in Palestine and Iraq.

First off, I've personally never put stock into the "How would you feel?" argument. It never compares apples to apples and there are so many different points of view that the exercise becomes meaningless. I can easily ask your question to the Kurds in the north and get a completely different answer than what you're looking for. Or I can ask a former Saddam henchman how he feels about it. Or I can ask someone who had their wife killed by Saddam and get a 3rd answer.

There is no one Iraqi citizen profile where that question works. And you're asking me how I would feel when obviously my situation would be compeltely different. How would you feel if your leader committed genocide against your people and the UN did nothing about it? Etc...

The feelings that the majority of Iraqis have for America is not important. They don't have to love or hate America as a requirement for getting the job done there. If they do cheer American deaths, which is a pretty strong word, they sure as hell aren't cheering for the insurgents who did it. Nor the terrorists. My point is that the peaceful Iraqis and the insurgents are worlds apart and you're linking the feelings of one with the actions of another.

"But why do they do them? They re trying to get even, not start a war."

Who are they? And what is "trying to get even?"

 

"they" would be the parties that feel that unjustice has (subjectively) been done to them and they justify their killings and acts by the fact that they re on the other side of the tennis net. I doubt there's a single man in their right minds that likes to go around killing people for the fun of it.

In that context, even Israelis feel they have a certain "right" to occupy lands in the middle east. But when it comes to US troops for example, there's no subjective feeling of justice in applying force, it's plainly done for the country's benefits. This is something that would make the "justice" fight of a "terrorist" (freedom fighter) honestly believe that what he's doing is to free his country for example.

 

Yeah, the same way AIDS has brought some positive changes.

 

That comment is just wrong in so many ways and doesn't compare at all.

 

Taucias I have to defend GaijinPunch, since I know his comment was very ironic, if not sarcastic. Since what he ment was , Bush is an arsehat, and a big cunt . Anyway and what he ment with the AIDS , was a counteranswer to the Bush comment.

 

Besides, let's not insult the HIV virus or AIDS' intelligence. It's a constantly changing virus that scientists have been battling for years to beat to no avail unfortunately. Bush is just down right thick

 

When Bill Clinton came in the white house. Then Hillary said while she was spreading her legs "read my lips, no more bush !". And when Bushwacker junior came into the white house. Then his wife said while she was spreading her legs, "read my lips, Bush strikes back" , or a variant "bush is back !". I know it is a silly joke, but be real we all know the worst of the presidents will always get a very cruel joke, in the aftermath. And yes I am trying to lighten up the thread a little.

 

We have every reason and right to tell North Korea it has no right to a nuclear bomb. We have reason and right to tell Iran they can't have nuclear weapons. If we allow all these nations to have nuclear weapons, all of a sudden it's a big mexican stand off with the most destructive weapons in the history of mankind. Right now there's only a few players in that game. But if all of a sudden these little nations aqquire such weapons, now some little fucktard in podunk no where can threaten your country with a nuclear weapon.

I don't like that at all. And I don't care what people say about the US and it's previous use of the nuclear weapons during world war 2. It was completely justified as it was, omg, WAR. And I think while we should be careful about using them in the future, the United States should always be ready to launch a nuclear strike on every single target we may need to. Infact I think we should have a large build up of nuclear sub-marines ready to launch a first strike, as well as developing missile defense systems.

I know it seems crazy, but I want my nation ready for war, and ontop of the weapons game. While we've certainly had more than our share of bad leadership, I think the USA and other great nations have a job of playing watchdog over the world. Lets face it, without the big guys (generally with nuclear weapons) every little country that hates some other country would start some shit.

Honestly I won't be surprised when World War 3 starts during our life times. That is exactly what will happen if we lose the balance and big boy refrees, such as the US and China. Which makes me feel sorry for Japan, with a billion chinese so close who are going to destroy them if/when WW3 starts. Aren't you all glad for the world's two greatest technologys, Nuclear WarHeads and ICBMs? Fun fun...

 

""they" would be the parties that feel that unjustice has (subjectively) been done to them and they justify their killings and acts by the fact that they re on the other side of the tennis net. I doubt there's a single man in their right minds that likes to go around killing people for the fun of it."

But there are plenty of men in their right minds who will send a 16-year old boy to a market to kill babies? What are earth made you believe these men were working on any level that resembles logic? You think they're studying some "factful" history lesson that gave them that conclusion?

It's brainwashing. The older men who want to keep up this pointless war brainwash the younger generation into killing themselves and others. Israel will never go away, yet they continue to fight for her destruction. And why do you think the terrorists care about the people? Hezbollah put rockets in residential areas to increase civilian casualties to raise the anger at Israel. Hamas can't even pay it's own people. Find me any Arab who wants to live under Osama.


"In that context, even Israelis feel they have a certain "right" to occupy lands in the middle east. But when it comes to US troops for example, there's no subjective feeling of justice in applying force, it's plainly done for the country's benefits. This is something that would make the "justice" fight of a "terrorist" (freedom fighter) honestly believe that what he's doing is to free his country for example."

Just about every use of force that's ever been used by any nation in the history of the world has been done for it's own benefit. There is nothing unique about this case, for either the US for attacking or for Europe doing nothing. It was all about what was in their best interests and it always will be. Why do you think genocide was important to Europe in Kosovo but not as important to them in Iraq?

And you're comfortable using the term "freedom fighter" for a group of men who are using terrorism to achieve their goal of eliminating freedom? How did that happen?

Terrorism isn't any way a natural result. If it were then you'd see a majority of Palestinians/Iraqis using it instead of miniscule percentages. Nearly all of the people have lived under the conditions that you descirbe as the creators of terrorism yet nearly all of them reject terrorism. It is in no way a logical thought process and it is not being used to help the people who they claim to be fighting for.

Hamas and Hezbollah want Israel destroyed, period, no coextence. Osama wants to be king of all Arabs in a Taliban state. These goals have nothing to do with the plight of the average Palestinian or Iraqi.

 

I have no idea why I wrote "factful" instead of "factual." Gomen...heh.

 

I realise he was being sarcastic (not ironic), but you don't make light of things like AIDS, at least not in my book.

 

I am on the same page, there is no light side of AIDS. And yes he was sarcastic, since he was spiteful in his "irony" (yes sarcasm IS spiteful irony). But why he said it, was because Bush isn´t good at all. Sorry USA. And GaijinPunch is an American, but I remember him telling this, since he has lived alot of years in Japan. And what he said was, "when I came "home" the people I knew, and those around me, were fuckedup beyound any recognition". Meaning the society he knew wasn´t there anymore. And why has he said that ? because he has become in some ways a Japanese man. In mind, and thought. And because he was a more laidback person, because his horizon had expanded more than just the usual. Since I know I am a Dane, and yes I know I am VERY laidback, but that is how I am raised to be, and not getting strange in my head over small things. Like my laws, and stuff. But to some people, then my country is fuckedup, no I am not talking about recent events, but older topics, and stuff. Where people call me, and well my country fuckedup, because "we" are more laidback than some other countries.
And again, when misinformation (24 year old information) comes into the picture, then I also stand up. And say some fuckedup things.

Ok my point is, "stop radioactivity", but again, I am not a politician, and sadly it is in the air for you and me.

And here is a saying, that I understand(but I don´t agree with anyway), to have peace, you have to prepare for war.

 

Whats benifits has the US gained by invading Iraq? Alot of people are dead, and alot more people hate us. Look at all them benifits. I don't disagree that oil is important, but it's not like they went over there and started sapping up the oil for themselves. Really we probably went in there because Bush wanted to, no other reason. I would agree that they might have been aiming at some benifits, but there are none now. It's a lost cause as it stands now.

I'm sure everyone would love it if we could all get along. But it's hard to make people raised and taught to hate to suddenly get along with us. That's the real problem with certain places in the world. That and governments that either teach that to their people or simply allow it to be taught or haboring such people. The worst kind of enemy is one that won't ever quit hating you because they've been brain washed into a zombie, and not the cool flesh eating Resident Evil kind.