24 Jun 06
Originally posted by whodeyHell, let it go up. Odds are good it will come down in North Korea anyway.
With all this talk about the United States knocking out North Korea's intercontinental missle that could hit the good old US of A that is due to be tested, what do you people think? Should it be taken out before it can be tested by North Korea?
24 Jun 06
Originally posted by sword4damoclesOz had better watch waht they say to NK...all NK has to do is get a million gong-banging, whistle-blowing screaming NK shock troops ashore and it's all over...except the U.S. would come running to the rescue, which is to be expected, right esoterica?
Australia has warned North Korea. I don't think NK will launch it now. 😛
24 Jun 06
Originally posted by chancremechanicYou mean the US would run to the rescue, start a civil war, imprison Aboriginies (they don't look like WASPS and are a potential terrorist threat) in Guatanomo and end up in Vietnamesque circumstances...
except the U.S. would come running to the rescue, which is to be expected, right esoterica?
You know what? I don't think the US should bother rescueing anybody until their president can pin point the country on a map.
(Australia is down South, by the way. It not next to Switzerland).
24 Jun 06
Originally posted by GinRoseSo do we intervene before they can test their missile or let them perfect their weapons? It is not about whether they should or should not have them. It is about what we do now since they do have them. On the one hand you wish you could ignore them and maybe they will go away. On the other hand, you think that ignoring them and leaving them alone is akin to "Hitlitarian" appeasement and there will be a higher price to pay by acting later than sooner.
North Korea is a rogue nation under the control of a sick little twisted madman. It has no business having nuclear weapons or missiles.
24 Jun 06
Originally posted by whodeyIf we stopped the launch through military means, N Korea would be forced to retaliate - there are only so many options in this arena. China would be pissed and the action would severely damage S Korean relations.
So do we intervene before they can test their missile or let them perfect their weapons? It is not about whether they should or should not have them. It is about what we do now since they do have them. On the one hand you wish you could ignore them and maybe they will go away. On the other hand, you think that ignoring them and leaving them alone is akin ...[text shortened]... "Hitlitarian" appeasement and there will be a higher price to pay by acting later than sooner.
A pre-emptive strike in this case is not an option.
-JC
24 Jun 06
Originally posted by chancremechanicWhat noone realises is Australia's great natural defense. Send in the shock troops and in 5minutes they'll go; Hey! theres beaches and and cool looking chicks and 5% alchohol per volume beer not that silly watered down stuff and did I mention the sun and the relaxed lifestyle.
Oz had better watch waht they say to NK...all NK has to do is get a million gong-banging, whistle-blowing screaming NK shock troops ashore and it's all over...except the U.S. would come running to the rescue, which is to be expected, right esoterica?
They wouldnt know what hit them!