Originally posted by: her209
And why or why not?
Originally posted by: Morph
That's funny, I hear no one talking about freeing the people of NK from their tyrannical regime. That's why we invaded Iraq, right? But since NK isn't a pushover (and they don't have any oil either), we should say hell with the people and "let them starve to death"? I think I'm understanding now. We Americans are great humanitarians but only when it's convenient and serves a useful purpose for us.
Do you understand anything about international politics? All decisions are made based on cost/benefit analysis. The cost of taking Iraq was deemed to be outweighed by the benefit, both for the US and for the Iraqi people. The cost of attempting to take North Korea is not so clear, and possibly disastrous. You talk as if you don't understand this simple point.Originally posted by: Morph
That's funny, I hear no one talking about freeing the people of NK from their tyrannical regime. That's why we invaded Iraq, right? But since NK isn't a pushover (and they don't have any oil either), we should say hell with the people and "let them starve to death"? I think I'm understanding now. We Americans are great humanitarians but only when it's convenient and serves a useful purpose for us.
"That's why we invaded Iraq, right?"Originally posted by: Morph
That's funny, I hear no one talking about freeing the people of NK from their tyrannical regime. That's why we invaded Iraq, right? But since NK isn't a pushover (and they don't have any oil either), we should say hell with the people and "let them starve to death"? I think I'm understanding now. We Americans are great humanitarians but only when it's convenient and serves a useful purpose for us.
I think most people would like to see the people of NK free of the tyrannical regime in Pyongyang. It's entirely different though when you ask if they should be freed by military force. NK is not Iraq and the dynamics in that part of the world are too different to apply the same reasoning.Originally posted by: Morph
That's funny, I hear no one talking about freeing the people of NK from their tyrannical regime. That's why we invaded Iraq, right? But since NK isn't a pushover (and they don't have any oil either), we should say hell with the people and "let them starve to death"? I think I'm understanding now. We Americans are great humanitarians but only when it's convenient and serves a useful purpose for us.
No credible indications of any such thing have been shown. NK, on the other hand can possibly sell nuclear weapons to terrorists. This is in stark contrast to Iraq, which doesn't have any significantly effective terrorist weapons to sell. So the terrorism angle is right out.Iraqi Regime has welcomed al Qaeda fighters.
So? Israel can take care of itself, or perhaps we should say that you are already taking care of Israel with the gigantic economic support they receive.Dropped scuds on Israel...
The US doesn't care about "UN Compliance", remember?Hussein was out of UN Compliance for over 10 years!
All with US approval and support.Hussein has used chemical weapons against his own people and against his neighbors, he has invaded his neighbors, he has killed thousands of his own people...