Iraq Vs North Korea
MrPink
Join Date: 2002-05-28 Member: 678Members
![MrPink](http://ourworld.cs.com/MrWhite403/mooninte_ns+copy.jpg)
in Discussions
I don't understand why we are putting so much pressure on Iraq right now. Yesterday, my teacher showed me an article of the 5 worst dictators, and the leader of North Korea was #1. According to the article, he had announced to the world that he is breaking a treaty which (used to) prevents him from producing nuclear and biological weapons, and will not allow UN inspectors in his country. Even more, he said that if we should invade Iraq, he may use them on us. Now, comparing to Iraq: Iraq has allowed inspectors into the country, and they haven't found any hard evidence of nuclear or biological weapons. I'm starting to think it is just about oil...But is it justified? Wars are terrible, but imagine the anarchy in the US that would follow if it ran dry of oil? Your opinions please.
Comments
Anyone who disagrees is entitled to there opinions *cough hippy pussys cough* have a nice day
And N. Korea is far worse a threat, but Iraq has oil!
On Topic:
I think it is rather ridiculous to compare dictators around the world to find out which one is the worst and should be put to rest by the US. The US has no business in Iraq nor North Korea except for the fact that they think they have to police the globe or something. Even if a alck of oil lead to anarchy in the States I'd rather say "So be it" than agree with an invasion of Iraq just because the US needs that oil, if that was the point of this discussion whatsoever. (Uh...btw... isn't there alot of oil in Alaska anyway? So, I guess anarchy because of a lack of oil in the US is kinda far fetched...)
Anyway... I think all this dictators and who's the worst stuff is not US business, but rather world policy and should therefor not be decided by the US alone. But if you were only saying that North Korea is right now pushing its limits a lot harder than Iraq, than you're probably right...
btw, war=not for oil, read several hundred unbias pages of information on the Iraqi conflict and any logical human being who can read will come to the same conclusion. Though there MIGHT be some positive economic benefits for certain businesses if a war took place, same if one didn't.
Alaska has a lot of oil, but if Shrub drills in ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) I'm gonna support war on iraq.
We absolutely do not want to be divided in sending forces to Iraq and North Korea simultaneously - that is strategically the worst case scenario. Once we're through with Iraq, then we'll see to it that North Korea gets theirs.
These countries keep violating treaties, but they merely get slapped on the wrist - what will we do or say when they're threatening us with Nucler/Chemical/Biological attacks if they don't get what they want? We should stick to our guns while we still have em.
*cough* Israel *cough*
*cough* Pakistan *cough*
Seems that once nations get nuclear weapons the US loses any interest in doing anything about them. But when they KNOW a nation has nothing (Iraq) they go in gung-ho.
Don't give us that "They're threatening us" joke. Iraq couldn't threaten you even if they had WMD.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> North Korea is a threat, but can easily be dealt with. They are bluffing, any attack would result in their utter destruction. Iraq will be, and should be disarmed; according to previous treaties they have signed. Search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction on goggle, you'll find lots of information on it<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Easily dealt with...ever taken a trip to Korea? The US wants the whole thing calmed down, they don't want war on the Korean penninsula because that would be huge. Forget Iraq this would be HUGE. The US doesn't care Nth korea has nukes as long as they don't get used. The US isn't going to go in there and take them or bomb them because they know what would be unleased.
Also, you freely admit that "They are bluffing, any attack would result in their utter destruction." Then we have nothing to worry about Iraq either, because any attack by them would result in Iraq's utter destruction. So what are we worried about? Why not let the inspectors finish their jobs?
Btw, I can do a search on google for Moon Landings Hoax and get hundreds of sites telling me exactly how it was faked. Does that make it any more credible? No. And most of the sites you describe refer to Iraq's WMD programs prior to the Gulf War.
*cough* Israel *cough*
*cough* Pakistan *cough*
Seems that once nations get nuclear weapons the US loses any interest in doing anything about them. But when they KNOW a nation has nothing (Iraq) they go in gung-ho.
Don't give us that "They're threatening us" joke. Iraq couldn't threaten you even if they had WMD.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> North Korea is a threat, but can easily be dealt with. They are bluffing, any attack would result in their utter destruction. Iraq will be, and should be disarmed; according to previous treaties they have signed. Search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction on goggle, you'll find lots of information on it<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Easily dealt with...ever taken a trip to Korea? The US wants the whole thing calmed down, they don't want war on the Korean penninsula because that would be huge. Forget Iraq this would be HUGE. The US doesn't care Nth korea has nukes as long as they don't get used. The US isn't going to go in there and take them or bomb them because they know what would be unleased.
Also, you freely admit that "They are bluffing, any attack would result in their utter destruction." Then we have nothing to worry about Iraq either, because any attack by them would result in Iraq's utter destruction. So what are we worried about? Why not let the inspectors finish their jobs?
Btw, I can do a search on google for Moon Landings Hoax and get hundreds of sites telling me exactly how it was faked. Does that make it any more credible? No. And most of the sites you describe refer to Iraq's WMD programs prior to the Gulf War. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
First off, the U.N. is a joke, it's degrading into the league of nations.
Second off, how is North Korea a threat to the U.S.? Saddam is an actual threat as he has Weapons of Mass Destruction, wouldn't mind usuing them, and has plenty of means to do it as well; terrorists.
Saddam is the biggest threat to US saftey at this point in time, and will be dealth with accordingly.
North Korea doesn't want to see the U.S. dead, they want something else which will reveail itself in due time.
Saddam is the biggest threat to US saftey at this point in time, and will be dealth with accordingly.
North Korea doesn't want to see the U.S. dead, they want something else which will reveail itself in due time. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't know where to begin, so I guess I'll just browse through the last four weeks of CNNs news archive:
<a href='http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/01/24/nkorea.nukes/index.html' target='_blank'>North Korea is openly working on nuclear weaponry,</a>, <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/01/23/korea.north.frontline.reut/index.html' target='_blank'>Kim Yong Il is faithful he'd win a war with the US</a>, <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/01/23/korea.north.frontline.reut/index.html' target='_blank'>a nice overview</a>, <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/12/us.nkorea/index.html' target='_blank'>oh, and by the way, they can hit <i>you</i></a>.
The inspectors in the Iraq have yet to find a "smoking gun" while North Korea is openly building assault rifles.
Honestly, I think there's one main reason why Korea isn't being invaded right now: Attacking a country which actually possesses weapons of mass destruction is really quite dangerous.
Attacking Iraq is a suicide attempt. and he doesn't have terrorists, he has SCUD missiles and soldiers. Contrary to CNN and other news sources, Al Qaeda and Saddam do not get along. In fact, Saudi Arabia offered Osama bin Laden a lot of money (40 mil) to take out Saddam. And Saddam has openly declared his hatred of O bL. Watch the real news such as BBC and Al-Jazeera instead of accepting CNN as the word.
Don't give us that "They're threatening us" joke. Iraq couldn't threaten you even if they had WMD.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think most of you fail to realize that even a simple piece of Artillery is a "Weapon of Mass Destruction". They call artillery the "killer of war", because of its hugely devastating effects on morale, the battlefield itself, and anything that gets struck by it.
Saying that Iraq has no "WMD's" is total bullcrap - every country has them regardless. A three man mortar crew can wreak more havoc on a group of people or vehicles than a whole mess of guided missiles.
Now, I know that Artillery does not have the range of missiles or rockets, making it less of a threat, but it is no less dangerous in itself.
And how do you <b>KNOW</b> Iraq does not have nuclear devices? They definitely have a whole mess of chemical weapons, and I know for a fact that they have many different forms of bio weapons such as Small Pox, Anthrax, Botulism, and a plethora of other potential weapons. They "acquired" many of these diseases and how to manufacture them from the Soviet Union, who had NCB weapons factories near their closest borders with Iraq. And did you know that the same type of Anthrax that was used in mail envelopes, was developed by the USSR and Iraq? Luckily this is one of the least effective ways to use it, and we did not suffer many casualties.
It only takes a small bit of any type of bio weapon used in the right way to inflict tremendous casualties - and by tremendous I mean quarantine a city and start praying. The possibility of an attack such as this, however unlikely, is nonetheless a possibility.
Terrorist organizations and hostile governments know that we are deep into an Anti-Terrorism War. This means that any country that harbors Terrorists (Iraq trains 'em!) could potentially be our next target. We should not let them back themselves into a corner because that is when they'll fight most fiercely.
But oh, yes, they're secret. Great chain of logic.
No one can, we can all just asume what we wish, untill were told more
I can readily prove that there's nothing hinting at any kind of covert op and even more that the US government is apparently trying for a diplomatical solution.
I agree that North Korea seems like a much greater threat but the reality of them attacking the US is slim to none as I see it. Now Iraq loves to fund terrorists to attack us....but also North Korea sells its weapons its a tricky game.
Read Newsweek, watch the BBC/Al-Jazeera.
Saddam Hussein hates terrorists. Al Qaeda and it's allies hate Saddam Hussein. Therefore Iraq has no real terrorists to do it's dirtywork, it uses soldiers and missiles g*ddamnit.
And Iraq has one of the LARGEST pieces of artillery. or at least he did. If I remember my history correctly, it had roughly the range of 15-20 miles. Might be more. Still pretty impressive. and artillery is a WMD because you can't directly shoot an artillery cannon because they could be in a 180degree arc around you position and the farther you advance the greater that arc grows.
Unless he uses nukes in his artillery it is NOT a weapon of mass destruction
Artillery is a WMD because of the fact that you can't stop it from hitting. A dirty bomb still has to be set off.