# Report: North Korea May Have Conducted Nuclear Test



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Well, we've tried negotiations, we've tried treaties, we've tried sanctions... it's time to take N. Korea out.



> SEOUL, South Korea  South Korean media are reporting that North Korea may have conducted a nuclear test. YTN television is citing an unnamed government official and the Yonhap news agency cites a ruling party member as saying the nuclear test may have occured Monday morning.
> South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has convened an emergency meeting.


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Well, we've tried negotiations, we've tried treaties, we've tried sanctions... it's time to take N. Korea out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



let China do it--they're closer


----------



## Seraega (May 24, 2009)

The worst consequence of the unnecessary Iraq War is that Americans don't have the stomach left to take out the real douche bags in the world, otherwise Iran and N. Korea wouldn't be so bold.  They know our popular opinion is heavily against new conflicts.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

We need to get out of the wars we're already in, not enter into another one.


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

Seraega said:


> The worst consequence of the unnecessary Iraq War is that Americans don't have the stomach left to take out the real douche bags in the world, otherwise Iran and N. Korea wouldn't be so bold.  They know our popular opinion is heavily against new conflicts.



And who's fault is that ? Nice of the liberals to take all the punch out of American efforts. You don't liek the consequences ?  Shoulda thought about that years ago.


----------



## Seraega (May 24, 2009)

dilloduck said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> > The worst consequence of the unnecessary Iraq War is that Americans don't have the stomach left to take out the real douche bags in the world, otherwise Iran and N. Korea wouldn't be so bold.  They know our popular opinion is heavily against new conflicts.
> ...



WTF are you talking about?  I'm in favor of making a glass desert out of Iran... I didn't take the punch out of anything, the Cons knew perfectly well what they were doing that's why they didn't allow coffins to be shown on TV.  They knew they'd run out of public support even faster if people could see the dead service men coming back.  They KNEW exactly what they were doing by engaging in pointless wars.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

Seraega said:


> dilloduck said:
> 
> 
> > Seraega said:
> ...



You condemn pointless wars and advocate for "making a glass desert out of Iran" in the same post?


----------



## Seraega (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> > dilloduck said:
> ...



I don't think it'd be pointless to take out a young nuclear power before they get a big head on their shoulders.  Unlike N. Korea, Iran has the missiles to make their nukes effective.


----------



## brewerboy (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> Seraega said:
> 
> 
> > dilloduck said:
> ...





In all seriousness though, I find kind of disturbing that theres even a shred of uncertainty on whether these tests occured or not.

We should know for certain whether they did or didnt.


----------



## xotoxi (May 24, 2009)

Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, and America in their name.


----------



## Fraulein Hilda (May 24, 2009)

Wow.  Looky looky at the chickenhawks come lately.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> We need to get out of the wars we're already in, not enter into another one.



Nice idea - except that North Korea has long-range missiles and nuclear bombs. What exactly do you think N. Korea intends to do with both of those? Just sit on them?


----------



## Seraega (May 24, 2009)

xotoxi said:


> Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, and America in their name.



I'm down with that but can we make exemptions for the words France, and Canada too?


----------



## jgbkab (May 24, 2009)

xotoxi said:


> Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, and America in their name.



Uh oh Canada and Mexico....


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

Seraega said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > Seraega said:
> ...



The IAEA has found no evidence that Iran has broken the Non-Proliferation Treaty, so no I don't think another nonsensical war is good for the nation.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

xotoxi said:


> Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, *Israel* and America in their name.





But what if someone renamed their country "Cowbell?"


----------



## Fraulein Hilda (May 24, 2009)

By the way, David, I am an unapolgetic supporter of the state of Israel.


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

xotoxi said:


> Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, and America in their name.



we can't---China makes everything we buy.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > We need to get out of the wars we're already in, not enter into another one.
> ...



Maybe they want to deter people from invading them?


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Fraulein Hilda said:


> By the way, David, I am an unapolgetic supporter of the state of Israel.



Finally a brother in arms!

Which country do you think Israel should destroy first? Iran or Portugal?


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



That seems to be why people want them these days, doesn't it ?


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Yes, excellent idea! Before N. Korea developed a bomb, no one gave a shit about them. Now that they have a bomb, everyone wants to destroy them. Go North Korea!


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



LMAO---you have heard about the Korean War, I assume ?


----------



## Fraulein Hilda (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Fraulein Hilda said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, David, I am an unapolgetic supporter of the state of Israel.
> ...



Flip a coin!

And screw telling the Americans when they make a move on Iran.

It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission!


----------



## theunbubba (May 24, 2009)

Seraega said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > Seraega said:
> ...



I look at it this way. GW was cleaning up the mess of leaving Saddam in there and keeping our troops in a holding pattern. This took a piece off the "chess board" of international politics. There is one less madman to worry about now. And believe me, if we had just walked off and left Saddam in power it would have been an insane mess of having The Mullahs vs Saddam for the nuclear showdown in the region. And Israel would get hit in the crossfire.
As it is we now have to deal with one less threat (or potential threat if you listen to the libs).
In three years we will be able to take all of our troops out of Iraq as opposed to an open ended occupation of Kuwait and southern Iraq.
Now as the nutbags in NK get ready to go armed we can point to them and say to the Chinese that they have a madman standing on their front porch with a bomb in his hand screaming obscenities at the neighbors.
If we phrase it the right way the Chinese will listen.
It's all a matter of careful labeling. As any democrat will attest to.


----------



## theunbubba (May 24, 2009)

dilloduck said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Um you do know that was the 1950's don't you?


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

theunbubba said:


> dilloduck said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



um--you know it never ended dont you ?


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

theunbubba said:


> dilloduck said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



And yet our troops are still in South Korea.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

dilloduck said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



That was over 50 years ago. Again, no one gave a shit about Korea before they developed nukes. N. Korea could have just gone on and continued starving and torturing his people and everything would have been fine and dandy.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Fraulein Hilda said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Fraulein Hilda said:
> ...



Oh this is beautiful... just beautiful.


----------



## xotoxi (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, *Israel* and America in their name.
> ...


 
They'd be gone.  

And Israel would be gone too.

They'd all be gone.

Even Switzerland and Palau would be annihilated.

Only the USA would remain.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> theunbubba said:
> 
> 
> > dilloduck said:
> ...



Pretty stupid - isn't it? Why did we get involved in the Korean War again? How was that a threat against us? Seems like the beginning of a half century of getting involved in wars we shouldn't have been.


----------



## dilloduck (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > theunbubba said:
> ...



About as stupid as bankrolling Israel forever.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > theunbubba said:
> ...



No kidding, and it's far more than half a century.  So now my question is, why are you advocating that we get involved in more wars we shouldn't be in?


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Because North Korea can launch a long range missile and have it hit Japan.


----------



## xotoxi (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...


 
Then let Japan get into a war with them.


----------



## xotoxi (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...


 
We should invade Pakistan as well, because they have nuclear weapons that could destroy India, which would make Dell customer service even slower.


----------



## Article 15 (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Well, we've tried negotiations, we've tried treaties, we've tried sanctions... it's time to take N. Korea out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



IF this is _anyones_ problem it's China's.


----------



## Mad Scientist (May 24, 2009)

Fraulein Hilda said:


> Wow.  Looky looky at the chickenhawks come lately.


Remember when they were calling _us_ chickenhawks? Whether we were vets or not it didn't matter. "Get thee to Iraq, Chickenhawk!" was their cry.

Now it's _their_ turn: "Get your asses to Afghanistan Chickenhawk Liberals". Put up or shut up.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



So can we.


----------



## xotoxi (May 24, 2009)

dilloduck said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > Lets just bomb the fucking shit out of every country that doesn't have the words United, States, and America in their name.
> ...


 
We'll just have to be less materialistic.


----------



## DavidS (May 24, 2009)

xotoxi said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Japan has almost no military to speak of. Additionally, Japan has one of the most important economies in the world. If North Korea would attack Japan, it would be very bad.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



Yet they haven't attacked Japan, and I'm sure they realize attacking one of the United States' biggest trading partners would have serious consequences.


----------



## Article 15 (May 24, 2009)

DavidS said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



ftfy


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...



"Serious consequences?"

Like what? We'll go to the UN and complain? All North Korea has to do is launch one missile. The way the N. Korean's are treated in every day life - I cannot imagine they really care too much about consequences.


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Article 15 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...



You need to add Boston Red Sox to your signature.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



I doubt very seriously that the U.S. would simply complain to the U.N. if North Korea fired a missile at Japan.


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Really? Where are the troops that we're going to send in to defeat North Korea? Our military is strained due to two wars we're in. 

We have about 10,000 US troops at the DMZ - and with great respect to our troops, they wouldn't last long against 1 MILLION North Korean troops and over 2,000 advanced fighter jets and bombers N. Korea gets from Russia and China.


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

NORTH KOREA HAS TEST-FIRED A SHORT-RANGE MISSILE AFTER CONDUCTING AN UNDERGROUND  NUCLEAR TEST, SOUTH KOREAN MEDIA REPORT.

Breaking News | Latest News | Current News - FOXNews.com


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



Why are you advocating that "it's time to take North Korea out" now when they haven't even done anything, when you clearly see that we're already stretched too thin?


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



So what do you think we should do? Let them continue making bombs and exploding them and then one day invading South Korea and then Japan and then, who knows? Let's give them Hawaii to appease them.

Obama just got his 3 am phone call.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



In one post you say let's take them out, and in another you ask me what we can do about anything because we're spread too thin.  I don't understand your logic.

As to what I would do, it wouldn't include calling for us to invade North Korea simply because they tested a missile.


----------



## Article 15 (May 25, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



David's all about pushing for a war as long as he doesn't have to fight it himself.  

I bet he was all about going into Iraq back in 2003.


----------



## Article 15 (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



How very neoconservative of you to say all that.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (May 25, 2009)

Isn't it telling what threads get merged.


----------



## Article 15 (May 25, 2009)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Isn't it telling what threads get merged.



WTF are you bitching about _now_?


----------



## Bootneck (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Well, we've tried negotiations, we've tried treaties, we've tried sanctions... it's time to take N. Korea out.



Another armchair warrior! Pull on a uniform and put yourself up as a candidate for front line service before rattling your sabre so loudly.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (May 25, 2009)

Article 15 said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't it telling what threads get merged.
> ...



Absolutely nothing, as evidenced by my quoted post. Are you baiting me? If I am not to respond in public to mods why would you ask me in public to do so?


----------



## Article 15 (May 25, 2009)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



Baiting you?  No.  

I'm wondering why would you start up something by saying, "Isn't it telling what threads get merged" ...

Are you just trolling to see which mod would ask you WTF you are talking about?

Since you have demonstrated your working knowledge of the rules around here if you have a problem with some threads that aren't getting merged then by all means report the threads you believe need to be merged.  

Otherwise, *shut the fuck up* and quit with these airy, conspiracy theory posts about mod actions.


----------



## Annie (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > We need to get out of the wars we're already in, not enter into another one.
> ...



Sell them.


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Kevin_Kennedy said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Once again, they did not just test a missile. They tested a nuclear bomb, probably the equivalent of the bomb that we dropped over Hiroshima.


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Article 15 said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Kevin_Kennedy said:
> ...



Please, let's not call each other names. I realize you're a Red Sox fan and probably still bitter about 1986 and all of the playoff games in the '90s and '00s that you lost to the Yankees, but come on....


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

Bootneck said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Well, we've tried negotiations, we've tried treaties, we've tried sanctions... it's time to take N. Korea out.
> ...



So it's wrong to call for war if I'm not in the military? Hey, bub, I pay taxes for our military to work. I pay Obama's salary. I have a right not to be nuked to death


----------



## jgbkab (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Once again, they did not just test a missile. They tested a nuclear bomb, probably *the equivalent of the bomb that we dropped over Hiroshima*.



Where did you get that information?


----------



## Bootneck (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Bootneck said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



As I said, enlist and then call for war. Then perhaps you may just gain a gnat's prick of credibility. Your post makes about as much sense as a cat flap in a submarine.


----------



## Ame®icano (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



I wouldn't say Japan has no military. They do have it, although is small, but very well equipped and superior to mostly everything that North Korea has. Some 900 tanks and 200 Eagles can do some pretty good damage.


----------



## AVG-JOE (May 25, 2009)

Seraega said:


> The worst consequence of the unnecessary Iraq War is that Americans don't have the stomach left to take out the real douche bags in the world, otherwise Iran and N. Korea wouldn't be so bold.  They know our popular opinion is heavily against new conflicts.




Not doing business with N Korea and Iran has proven to be futile.

What if we quit doing business with everyone who does business with N Korea and Iran?

Tell Sweden, France and Germany that they can shove their Volvos, wine and BMW's straight up their asses if they want to continue doing business with Iran...  Do you think we might get the attention of the Iranian people then?

What if we told the Chinese that they could turn their Wal-Mart bound boats around until they put proper economic pressure on their noisy neighbor?

Why does 'power' and 'military' have to be inseparable terms for us?

-Joe


----------



## DavidS (May 25, 2009)

jgbkab said:


> DavidS said:
> 
> 
> > Once again, they did not just test a missile. They tested a nuclear bomb, probably *the equivalent of the bomb that we dropped over Hiroshima*.
> ...



The size of the "tremor" was 10x bigger than it was a few years ago.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Kevin_Kennedy said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



Key word being "tested," which is not something to "take them out" over.  Though I'm still curious how you can acknowledge that we're spread too thin around the world and still call for an invasion of North Korea.


----------



## Paulie (May 25, 2009)

Why bother discussing these matters with Dave?  The guy has a different political position each day.


----------



## Article 15 (May 25, 2009)

DavidS said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> > DavidS said:
> ...



Projecting much, Met "fan?"

I mean we all know you don't really follow baseball or anything but I figured I would inform you that the Red Sox have won a couple of World Series in the last 5 years.


----------



## Chris (May 25, 2009)

Kim Jong has been ill for several months now.

Who takes over when he dies?


----------



## Annie (May 25, 2009)

Chris said:


> Kim Jong has been ill for several months now.
> 
> Who takes over when he dies?



Kim Jong Il 'names favourite son Jong Un as successor' in North Korea - Times Online




> January 16, 2009
> Kim Jong Il 'names favourite son Jong Un as successor' in North Korea
> 
> (KCNA/Reuters)
> ...


----------



## cbi0090 (May 25, 2009)

Kim Jong is like a spoiled child whose temper tamtrems have successfully gotten him what he's wanted in the past and sees no reason to change his behaviour now.  As long as he holds a gun to the heads of the South Koreans there's not much we can really do, except hope for better once he dies.  He learned it from his father, who started by threatening war, then by building a massive missle and mortar arsenal, now nuclear bombs.  It's a wait and see game, at this point because there's nothing anyone can do unless we want to sacrifice South Korea.


----------



## Demagogue (May 26, 2009)

Our attempts to talk with North Korea have failed. We have tried offering them aid, we have taken them off of our "black list" of countries that sponsor terrorism. We have sanctioned them through the years, and yet this country, which by all rights deserves it's sovereignty, has spat in the faces of those who have attempted to help. It refuses to go through sanctions, and will no longer accept the aid that the UN is so willing to give in return for compliance by the North Koreans.

The time has come to form an alliance with the People's Republic of China to combat this foe. We cannot suffer the safety of nations to be endangered by the ambitions of one madman in the small area known as North Korea.


----------



## Annie (May 26, 2009)

Demagogue said:


> Our attempts to talk with North Korea have failed. We have tried offering them aid, we have taken them off of our "black list" of countries that sponsor terrorism. We have sanctioned them through the years, and yet this country, which by all rights deserves it's sovereignty, has spat in the faces of those who have attempted to help. It refuses to go through sanctions, and will no longer accept the aid that the UN is so willing to give in return for compliance by the North Koreans.
> 
> The time has come to form an alliance with the People's Republic of China to combat this foe. We cannot suffer the safety of nations to be endangered by the ambitions of one madman in the small area known as North Korea.



China will act in its own best interest. If they really crack down, hundreds of thousands of N. Koreans will flood across the border into China. Think Korean War response from China, in reverse. They do not want the problems West Germany has had with the East. Imagine fleeing to 'China' for better conditions?


----------



## Gunny (May 26, 2009)

Seraega said:


> dilloduck said:
> 
> 
> > Seraega said:
> ...



Ridiculous assumption.

I suppose it's safe to say then the lefties knew perfectly well what they were doing by supporting the invasion of Iraq before they were against it?  

Nah, fact is the left was screaming for Saddam's head every bit as loud as the right.  Then the hacks shouted down the few normal people remaining on the left with a bunch of bullshit lies.  

The favorite being the only reason we went in was because of WMDs (untrue), and that Saddam didn't have any WMDs (untrue -- we sold the damned things to him and he is STILL accountable to the UN for missing MWDS/WMD percurssors).  

I find the fact that anyone, right or left, wants to show photographs of KIA US military personnel for political propganda reprehensible.  

Since they knew exactly what they were doing engaging in pointless wars, perhaps you might enlighten us as to your speculative reasoning?  

For your edification, and to cut some of the leftwingnut fools off, I did not agree with the invasion of Iraq, but not for any of the intellectually dishonest reasons put forth by the left.  

At the same time, I'm STILL waiting for an answer 6 years later to what exactly did you propose to do about Saddam?  He was tying up our military anyway.  He was purchasing his way out of sanctions via under the table oil deals with France for UN votes.  Were we supposed to just foot the bill for babysitting Saddam's ass indefinitely?  

And, if you are for making Iran a glass parking lot, why not North Korea and Iraq as well?  Shall we add Afghanistan and Pakistan to the list?  Who's next?

Kim Jong Il is just another Saddam Hussein.  He's going to rattle his sabre for handouts and he's going to get them.


----------

