No Ice at North Pole?

We will not send in our Guys into a conflict, wich asian guys better solve them selfs…

…ah what was his name again?!?.. 8-)

Whatever makes ´em happy…

As I recall from the movie, when Longstreet says to him, "You people had your own civil war, didn’t you?’ Fremantle opens his reponse with a breezy, “Oh, that.”  Funny line, nicely delivered by the actor.

@Adlertag:

@frimmel:

@Brain:

This whole thread is political.

Yes, but it has not devolved into the bashing, blame-slinging, so-and-so politician is an a%#hat, sort of stuff that got the political discussion board shut down. It has remained civil and avoided any sort of ‘partisan bent’ and been mostly a strategy discussion.

Yes butt that korean retard jim jong sung II want to nuke us, man, he want to nuke us straigt to h*ll, and how bizare it must be, we are not allowed to call him names, because we must be political correct and not offend nor insult any criminal lame retard moron whatsoever, even if it is pretty obvious that it was just this kind of BS appeasement policy that got the world deep into st in 1939, and I figure that all this lame st is gonna happen again, a** it did last time, butt this time you cant blame it on europe.

I also like the way he says a** it did last time. I wonder if that was on purpose? :-D

@BigBlocky:

I’m a great fan of the UN but…… It has lately been a disaster… Germany in my opinion has taken herself entirely out of the equation, it is her choice. …Anybody who says “No matter what happens, I won’t do a thing” loses their right to consultation.

True, i am not happy with that too firm position as well. But to be honest: In my memory the US started similar in the opposite position, not really accepting any “evidence” against their point.

If the UN is hell bent on being useless as it was in Bosnia at Srebrencia … useless as it was in Rwanda …

The UN is not the world government. It can only be as strong as it members want it to be, especially as the strongest member wants it to be.
It’s not the worlds policeman, and it doesn’t have an own army to command. You can say it is weak, and i wouldn’t object. But: do you want it stronger or shattered?

No, I’m sorry. The US has shown enough evidence. Even if there were no weapons of mass destruction there is no argument that I have heard that convinces me it’s better to let this mass murderer stay in control and hold hostage a country of 22 million.

You are right in the second part of that caption, but i would not say at all that the US has shown enough evidence. It is more that the US defies what ever Hans Blix is saying: For the US, the Iraq is in a lose-lose situation. Whatever he does, the US won’t be satisfied and claim it’s further proof.

If you don’t want to left a finger to help these people then fine. But get the hell out of my way because I am coming through……

If your government had argued like that in the start, the situation would be totally different. To change the position now would lokk extremely silly and would hint that there is some hidden interest by the US that they don’t want to say alound.
For you coming through and me getting out of your way: If you always prefer action without thinking, then it might be better for you if i trip you while you pass me. Then we can sit together and make up a strategy that has more chances of success.
Assume you are right, and Saddam has WMD. Hoe many of his people do you think will survive being freed?

For the allied side I could see the U.S. South Korea, and maybe the U.K.
There is a chance that China would send “volunteers” to help North Korea.

For the second question that would be hard to say both Koreas would be hurt although the North would probably be hurt more cause of U.S. Air Power!

For the third question I would have to say it would depend. If on the battlefield maybe, Seoul or U.S. soil YES we would respond in kind!!

We feed Iraqis, We feed N. Koreans, we have a history of giving food to our enemies (like the Taliban)