What to do about North Korea...?

Recently, Morgans posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote

As I see it, it's a good thing NK doesn't have any oil.

And with this statement, it shows how little you truly understand the
whole issue.

Oh? The on-topic response to "the issue" is covered by what you deleted.

Amazing. Truly amazing.

What's truly amazing is that you chose to respond to the joke and ignored
the basic points.

Neil

Recently, Bob Noel posted:

In article ,
"Neil Gould" wrote:

A question to anyone in this discussion: if *you* were the leader of
North Korea, having US troops on your southern border for the last
50+ years; with the leader of the US calling you one of the "Axis of
Evil"; and having invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation (also on
the "Axis of Evil" list, btw) on the most obviously bogus of
pretenses, how would *you* respond to protect your population?

do you actually think that the "leader" of NK has any interest in
protecting "his" population?

Irrelevant. I wasn't asking about Kim Jong Il; I asked what *you* would
do.

time for a reality check.

Indeed.

For starters, it would be a good idea to know approximately how wide the
Pacific Ocean is. Then compare that figure with the experts' opinions of
the range of the Taepodong-2 missile sans payload (which though it has
never been successfully flown, its "range" has been somehow increased
about 3x from their original statements). Then try to reconcile the
completely irresponsible claims being made about it being able to deliver
a nuclear weapon that could reach the lower 48 states.

You're being had yet again.

Neil

In article ,
"Neil Gould" wrote:

do you actually think that the "leader" of NK has any interest in
protecting "his" population?

Irrelevant. I wasn't asking about Kim Jong Il; I asked what *you* would
do.

well, such a question isn't relevant. Rationale sane people are not in charge
of the nk government.

but I, for one, wouldn't bother trying to **** off the USA. I wouldn't **** away
government funds on a worthless military weapon systems when millions of
my citizens are starving.


time for a reality check.

Indeed.

For starters, it would be a good idea to know approximately how wide the
Pacific Ocean is.

perhaps you should learn something about missiles, in particular the flight path
for something between nk and the USA.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Recently, Bob Noel posted:

Rationale sane people are not
in charge of the nk government.

Some think the same about our leaders.

but I, for one, wouldn't bother trying to **** off the USA. I
wouldn't **** away government funds on a worthless military weapon
systems when millions of my citizens are starving.

I see; so you'd cozy up to the folks who think you're part of an "Axis of
Evil", and prefer that the popuce run around anxious that the US is going
to attack you next while they starve anyway. Hmm. Is that the rational and
sane approach?

perhaps you should learn something about missiles, in particular the
flight path for something between nk and the USA.

That isn't a matter of "missiles"; it's navigation of a geoid, and *still*
doesn't extend the range of their missle sufficiently to reach "...the
lower 48 states" as claimed. Perhaps you don't know where Korea is?

Neil

by "Morgans" Jul 6, 2006 at 10:12 AM


"Neil Gould" wrote

As I see it, it's a good thing NK doesn't have any oil.

And with this statement, it shows how little you truly understand the
whole
issue.

Amazing. Truly amazing



This whole discussion is a bunch of horse-****. The NKs missles pose no
threat to the US. The FARs PROHIBIT these things from flying in our
airspace.

No need for drastic action, like having Boyer "take on" the NKs....

("Skylune" wrote)
This whole discussion is a bunch of horse-****. The NKs missles pose no
threat to the US. The FARs PROHIBIT these things from flying in our
airspace.


I think they're ok above FL600, so long as they remain clear of clouds,
since Class E is "controlled" airspace.


Montblack

Neil Gould wrote:

A question to anyone in this discussion: if *you* were the leader of North
Korea, having US troops on your southern border for the last 50+ years;
with the leader of the US calling you one of the "Axis of Evil"; and
having invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation (also on the "Axis of
Evil" list, btw) on the most obviously bogus of pretenses, how would *you*
respond to protect your population? As I see it, it's a good thing NK
doesn't have any oil.

Bogus in your mind, maybe. I don't agree with the decision to invade
Iraq, but I DO believe they had WMD and were trying to make more. I
think there was some reason to invade, but I'm not sure how urgent
things were. I will, however, give Bush and company the benefit of the
doubt in that they may have known things that can't be made public.

As to your NK question, I certainly wouldn't respond by trying to bait
the US into a conflict? If that is what they are really worried about,
why all of the provocation? They aren't worried at all about invading
us. They need financial help and are trying to become a big enough pain
that we'll pay them off. This might have happened with Clinton in
office, but isn't likely with Bush.


Matt

In article ,
"Neil Gould" wrote:

Rationale sane people are not
in charge of the nk government.

Some think the same about our leaders.

some people think the world is flat



but I, for one, wouldn't bother trying to **** off the USA. I
wouldn't **** away government funds on a worthless military weapon
systems when millions of my citizens are starving.

I see; so you'd cozy up to the folks who think you're part of an "Axis of
Evil",

not ****ing off and "cozy up" are not at all the same thing.


[snip]

perhaps you should learn something about missiles, in particular the
flight path for something between nk and the USA.

That isn't a matter of "missiles"; it's navigation of a geoid, and *still*
doesn't extend the range of their missle sufficiently to reach "...the
lower 48 states" as claimed. Perhaps you don't know where Korea is?

I had to wonder if you had a clue since the dimension of the pacific ocean
isn't particularly when you go great circle route.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

In article ,
Bob Noel wrote:

A question to anyone in this discussion: if *you* were the leader of North
Korea, having US troops on your southern border for the last 50+ years;
with the leader of the US calling you one of the "Axis of Evil"; and
having invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation (also on the "Axis of
Evil" list, btw) on the most obviously bogus of pretenses, how would *you*
respond to protect your population?

do you actually think that the "leader" of NK has any interest in protecting
"his" population?

Exactly my response when I read the initial paragraph.

Matt Whiting wrote:

They need financial help and are trying to become a big enough pain
that we'll pay them off.



This is crucial since military spending is about 150% of GDP.