North Korea: Wipe USA off the map - Page 2

The Great Catpiss · 06-25-2009, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Ah yes...the longer Iran waits to destroy Israel, the more likely they'll be nuked by Israel.

absolutely... I would be worried about Israel if I was in Iran. I would be even more worried about Iran if I was in Israel.

But North Korea is the topic of the conversation here. Israel doesn't make threats on a daily basis that they will nuke Iran into non-existence, so I don't know how your statement is relevant.

Photon1001 · 06-25-2009, 09:48 PM

^yep. and Iran's threats are all talk, Ahmandinajad blowing smoke to rally up his base. Nothing to worry about for either of them, its just like India & Pakistan, its just a pissing contest for the politicians..

Donkey® · 06-26-2009, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

absolutely... I would be worried about Israel if I was in Iran. I would be even more worried about Iran if I was in Israel.

But North Korea is the topic of the conversation here. Israel doesn't make threats on a daily basis that they will nuke Iran into non-existence, so I don't know how your statement is relevant.

They don't threaten Iran? They bomb Syria when they feel like it. They have bombed Iraq and Iran when they felt like it. I don't recall the last time North Korea bombed us. Refresh my memory.

The Great Catpiss · 06-26-2009, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

They don't threaten Iran? They bomb Syria when they feel like it. They have bombed Iraq and Iran when they felt like it. I don't recall the last time North Korea bombed us. Refresh my memory.

Put on some reading glasses and reread what I wrote.

Show me proof that Israel threatens to nuke Iran on a daily basis. Better yet, show me proof that Israel has ever threatened to use a nuke on Iran.

Donkey® · 06-26-2009, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

Put on some reading glasses and reread what I wrote.

Show me proof that Israel threatens to nuke Iran on a daily basis. Better yet, show me proof that Israel has ever threatened to use a nuke on Iran.

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran - Times Online

Photon1001 · 06-26-2009, 04:44 PM

AFAIK, Israel has never attacked Iran ever, and hasn't Iraq in almost 30 years.

The Great Catpiss · 06-26-2009, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran - Times Online

And where does it show them publicly threatening to nuke Iran? You fail.

Donkey® · 06-26-2009, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

And where does it show them publicly threatening to nuke Iran? You fail.

Ha ha...so it HAS To be public to be real. Got it.

Which is more likely? North Korea striking us or Israel striking Iran? How about some common sense?

Photon1001 · 06-26-2009, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Ha ha...so it HAS To be public to be real. Got it.

Which is more likely? North Korea striking us or Israel striking Iran? How about some common sense?

Common sense should have that India and Pakistan would be more likely to come to blows then either of those scenarios. Especially considering that Israel is a country what, roughly the size of New Jersey, and there's some 1000-odd miles between the two. Both sides would lose too much, Israel would be obliterated but Iran would be decimated, as no doubt Israels arsenal would be larger. As for NK, from what I've read their missile range doesn't yet include any American target, and we have ballistic defense measures in the Pacific, so any attempt from NK to nuke the US would likely just end up nuking the open ocean, followed by the consequences of such a suicidal move.

Kytro · 06-27-2009, 03:57 AM

NK cannot strike the US in any effective manner at the moment. While I completely disagree with what they are doing I find it odd that the world believes it should be able to tell NK not to develop nuclear weapons, but Pakistan is allowed.

The Great Catpiss · 06-27-2009, 04:14 AM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Ha ha...so it HAS To be public to be real. Got it.

Which is more likely? North Korea striking us or Israel striking Iran? How about some common sense?

You continue to fail to prove how Iran is relevant.

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Ha ha...so it HAS To be public to be real. Got it.

Of course it has to be public. You ignorantly claimed that my statement was false implying that Israel "threatens" to "nuke" Iran on a "daily" basis.

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Which is more likely? North Korea striking us or Israel striking Iran? How about some common sense?

How is this relevant? That isn't even the argument. What the hell are you talking about?

The Great Catpiss · 06-27-2009, 04:20 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

NK cannot strike the US in any effective manner at the moment. While I completely disagree with what they are doing I find it odd that the world believes it should be able to tell NK not to develop nuclear weapons, but Pakistan is allowed.

NK can strike the US and our allies with weapons more destructive than nukes. While they wont win any war with the US, they can certainly do enough damage.

Donkey® · 06-27-2009, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

NK can strike the US and our allies with weapons more destructive than nukes. While they wont win any war with the US, they can certainly do enough damage.

A group of cave-dwellers did "enough damage" without having any weapons of mass destruction in their hands.

It's a great argument you have. OMG they can do *SOMETHING*!!! So can most of the world. Why people such as yourself want to live in fear of dragons and sorcerers I'll never know. I for one am not worried about North Korea one bit. Leave people alone, they have no reason to threaten us...attack us...bother us.

Donkey® · 06-27-2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

You continue to fail to prove how Iran is relevant.

No, you fail to see things you don't want to see. Your fear is apparently blocking all ability of your senses to operate.

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

Of course it has to be public. You ignorantly claimed that my statement was false implying that Israel "threatens" to "nuke" Iran on a "daily" basis.

What does that even matter? I am not sure of your premise here. Someone can threaten someone without making it public. The point of even bringing Iran and Israel into it is to show your hypocrisy. You're telling us we have to be preemptive against a country that's not even a threat. Well Israel IS a threat to Iran and in your logical quagmire, Iran is justified for threatening Israel and attacking them preemptively. But I am 100% certain you think Iran bad Israel good. Hypocrisy. Idiocy. Call it what you want.

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

How is this relevant? That isn't even the argument. What the hell are you talking about?

I'll repeat it for you in clear words. Your ability to grant us preemptive waivers to attack anyone we want can just as easily be applied to Iran if they feel Israel is a threat to them. Israel has nukes. Israel has plans to strike Iran. Seems like a threat to me. Yay Iran! Destroy those bastards before then can do any damage!

Photon1001 · 06-27-2009, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

..they have no reason to threaten us...attack us...bother us.

In fairness, though, neither did the cave-dwelling hijackers..

Donkey® · 06-27-2009, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Photon1001

In fairness, though, neither did the cave-dwelling hijackers..

Yes they did...we're out there shitting on their land....building bases..."westernizing" everything. One could say it was a behind the scenes crusade to wipe out their belief systems.

Photon1001 · 06-27-2009, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Yes they did...we're out there shitting on their land....building bases..."westernizing" everything. One could say it was a behind the scenes crusade to wipe out their belief systems.

..and there isn't an all out crusade against Marxist ideas? I beg your pardon then, I guess Fox News really is "fair and balanced", then...

Kytro · 06-27-2009, 08:37 PM

Originally Posted by The Great Catpiss

NK can strike the US and our allies with weapons more destructive than nukes. While they wont win any war with the US, they can certainly do enough damage.

They will likely attack SK, and maybe Japan - and do a great deal of damage in terms of lives if they believe they are going to lose power.

Photon1001 · 06-27-2009, 11:11 PM

Unlike Iran, NK doesn't have strong reform movements (even if their reformers tend to only be Islamic-nationalist partisan distractions). Unlike Iran, NK has no youth movements looking to express themselves in new and progressive ways. Unlike Iran, NK has no large numbers of ppl looking toward a future of more social, cultural and economic liberalization. Unlike Iran, NK's ppl are heavily indoctrinated since birth to love Kim as their father and patron saint, and most importantly, unlike Iran, NK is completely cut off from the rest of the world. (This may change in Iran to a degree if things keep up, but even still, Iran's doors of change have been opened, and the ppl's foot has been inserted. In NK, they basically have a half Taliban-esque regime, half pseudo-religious wacko-cult, and worse still, its been that way for over 2 generations now. An invasion of NK, might be quite a difficult task, as its highly unlikely that any outside force could ever be greeted as liberators, and much more likely to be treated as inhuman monsters from the unholy world of capitalism. There may be few if any civilians, and worse off they have nuclear weapons now and are talking about using them, and moreover there's no way to be sure if they are serious or not, as they're not likely to be thinking in terms we can understand anymore...

The Great Catpiss · 06-27-2009, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

It's a great argument you have. OMG they can do *SOMETHING*!!! So can most of the world. Why people such as yourself want to live in fear of dragons and sorcerers I'll never know. I for one am not worried about North Korea one bit. Leave people alone, they have no reason to threaten us...attack us...bother us.

Apparently you need to learn how to read.

My post was in response to "NK cannot strike the US in any effective manner at the moment." That is why I quoted it. You see when we quote something, it is usually because we are responding to it. It is a rather simple concept.