Originally posted by: Rockhound
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: Rockhound
No, human rights aside. here are the differences:
1) North Korea so far has not invaded anybody in the last 12 years.
2) North Korea has not used chemical weapons on their own people - at least as far as we know out in the open. Or on any of their neighbors. Iraq did on Iran.
3) As far as I know, there currently aren't any UN sanctions on North Korea regarding their nuclear weapons programs. Everything is being done by the U.S., South Korea and Japan if I'm not mistaken. They may be in violation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, but I don't see any actual UN sanctions they are violating. No resolutions have been drawn up telling North Korea to disarm.
4) There are already thousands (37,000 to be exact) of US troops already there.
5) North Korea has emphatically stated it doesn't want anyone else involved in the matter except the US. UN to them is irrelevant.
6) North Korea is being handled separately from other countries like Iraq because that is the best course of action at this time. So much can't be said for Iraq and its propensity to use its weapons, invade its neighbors, launch missiles against Israel, etc.
This only emphasizes that the U.S. is not just going to war because it feels like it at the drop of a hat.
1. Did you just randomly pick 12 or did you pick 12 to exclude the Korean War?
2. Iraq usd chemical/biological weapons that were supplied by the US. NK is in violations nonetheless.
3. So you believe this is a sufficient force to get NK to comply to our wishes?
4. So has Iraq.
5. Yep, that's why they had UN inspectors kicked out.
6. Oh you mean, NK won't invade SK if we just left?
1) No, I didn't randomly pick 12. Ok use 15 if you wish. Which is just about as long as North Korea has been trying to develop nukes. What's the Korean War got to do with this exactly? That was 50 years ago. We're talking about something that's a lot more recent.
2) It doesn't matter who they were supplied by. They used them. It could have been Brazil that supplied them. Who cares. The fact that they USED them is the issue here.
3) No it isn't. We are at this time trying diplomacy. You are the one that said "you don't see thousands of US troops rushing over there". What's your point exactly?
4) So has Iraq what? What are you referring to?
5) Yea, and? what's your point? They just recently kicked them out. They were only monitoring the nuclear facilities as well, not searching for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Iraq kicked out inspectors kicked out 4 years ago.
6) No, I didn't say that nor did I mean that. Who says North Korea won't invade with us there? So far they haven't. But those 37,000 troops aren't what's really stopping them now. Its a tripwire. Its not meant to actually stop them from invading if that is there intention. My point was that Iraq over the last decade has attacekd, unlike the North Koreans. They haven't really made a move toward anybody. So that is what you go by. The potential is there, but with Iraq there is more than just potential. They have demostrated that they will do it no matter what everyone thinks.
Facebook
Twitter