Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe NK is actually doing what the Chinesse wants them to do?

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This may be true. However my impression of the Chinese is that they would rather be left alone. I don't think China would want North Korea to stir things up so that the attention of the US gets focused on that part of the world.

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe that's the impression they want to give.

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

I don't know. I think it is a lot of adieu to make weapons in which it is stupid to use, in the first place. Oooh, nuclear weapons, when the very people they are trying to threaten with them is too close. It's amazing how people will repeat the same mistakes because they can't learn until they do it themselves. We already learned quickly about the futility and self-damaging effects of nuclear weapons, but some people don't realize that by far nukes are a double-edged sword, except worse. Imagine the double blade also being the handle. Its use is like some desperation act of taking your enemies out along with yourselves.

The weapons they want are not surgical with harmful effects that not only carry in wind, water, and soil, but possibly have half-lifes. And if they do use them, the effects will probably bleed into their own country and kill their own people off.

Or they just want some trophies to sit by doing nothing, but costing them loads of money to make, just to have a local health hazard, with hopes that nothing leaks into their water or other supply lines. I don't know. It sounds like somebody declaring to the world that they wanna commit suicide. Like the above poster said, it's like wanting a grenade when everybody is in the telephone booth with you.

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

But the world is such a big bad phone booth that some tiny countries need to threat their enemies to blow themselves up with them to keep them from invading.
You gotta be realistic. Only a nuclear power can deterrence conventional war.

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

After spending a year in South Korea courtesy of Uncle Sam, I wouldn't mind seeing both Koreas get bLasted into nothingness. That was the worst year of my life. But realistically, I think it will take the intervention of both the U.S. and China to see this one resolved. Who knows, after seeing "Shock and Awe" taking place in Iraq, maybe the North Koreans will see the ligth of reason

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What was your unit?

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

I don't remember my unit number now, but I was stationed at Kunsan AB (airbase) in the southern part of S. Korea. I was attached to the medical unit there. I was there from June 87 to June 88. Just missed my chance to see the 88 Olympics in Seoul.

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

Technically,
Iraq conditionally surrendered and they did not honor the surrender conditions. That can be used by some to justify the invasion and claim it is different than a war of aggression.

North Korea is not in the same boat. Their natinal soveriegnty is not compromised the way Iraqs is (was).

Re: Debate on North Korea.
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Gee, thanks. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif