The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Anyone watch the Docu-drama about the efforts of Abdul Haq to reunite Afghanistan and create a stable governing body, only to be repeatedly betrayed by the US government, indirectly resulting in the WTC disaster, and directly resulting in his gruesome execution?
I didn't think it was possible to hate the US government any more than I already did.
I didn't think it was possible to hate the US government any more than I already did.
Page:
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> true, but North Korea are a far more powerful entity than Iraq, and
> would put up a good fight, surely ....
Sure, but they'd lose in the end because any move by them would alienate the few allies they have. It is simply impossible, with conventional means, to beat the US and it's NATO allies. Damage them, scare them, worry them, possible. Defeat, impossible.
Even for North Korea, the display of power in Iraq must have been worrying. Prior to that, even in Afghanistan, US power had been restrained. Iraq was less restrained but still a fraction of the power the US has, and importantly the US has the will to use that power.
Don't get me wrong, in a war with North Korea nobody stands to win - which is why, despite the shouting and diplomatic spats, it won't happen.
> true, but North Korea are a far more powerful entity than Iraq, and
> would put up a good fight, surely ....
Sure, but they'd lose in the end because any move by them would alienate the few allies they have. It is simply impossible, with conventional means, to beat the US and it's NATO allies. Damage them, scare them, worry them, possible. Defeat, impossible.
Even for North Korea, the display of power in Iraq must have been worrying. Prior to that, even in Afghanistan, US power had been restrained. Iraq was less restrained but still a fraction of the power the US has, and importantly the US has the will to use that power.
Don't get me wrong, in a war with North Korea nobody stands to win - which is why, despite the shouting and diplomatic spats, it won't happen.
Emperor Xerxes Q.C. wrote:
> ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> Having said that, I don't think I hate any government more than that
> of North Korea. Perhaps one country that truly does need carpet
> bombing into none-existence?
>
> Yeah thats right because the people must be evil.
Hmmm, I recall saying the same thing to you when you wanted to nuke China because of the way their Government runs things. Talk about being hypocritical.
> ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> Having said that, I don't think I hate any government more than that
> of North Korea. Perhaps one country that truly does need carpet
> bombing into none-existence?
>
> Yeah thats right because the people must be evil.
Hmmm, I recall saying the same thing to you when you wanted to nuke China because of the way their Government runs things. Talk about being hypocritical.
true, but North Korea are a far more powerful entity than Iraq, and would put up a good fight, surely ....
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> Today saw the so called 'movement to disarm' WOMD programmes in North
> Korea. I would take that with a pinch of salt.
I wouldn't, North Korea's aim with this has been about trading compliance for food and financial aid - why else announce you have, sorry, claim to have, nuclear weapons when you didn't have to? There are a few scenarios for that, but the most likely was to get attention and then get aid in exchange for compliance.
North Korea is probably being jollied along by the new treatment Libya is receiving which is in line with what Bush and Blair said in 2001 - if states want to renounce their past ways, stop pursuing WMD and links to terrorism, want to negotiate, then we'll deal with them and it can be done peacefully and those places will see immediate benefits to doing so. I don't think there is a regime on this planet that wants to be the next Iraq because they all saw what happened live on the news.
> Today saw the so called 'movement to disarm' WOMD programmes in North
> Korea. I would take that with a pinch of salt.
I wouldn't, North Korea's aim with this has been about trading compliance for food and financial aid - why else announce you have, sorry, claim to have, nuclear weapons when you didn't have to? There are a few scenarios for that, but the most likely was to get attention and then get aid in exchange for compliance.
North Korea is probably being jollied along by the new treatment Libya is receiving which is in line with what Bush and Blair said in 2001 - if states want to renounce their past ways, stop pursuing WMD and links to terrorism, want to negotiate, then we'll deal with them and it can be done peacefully and those places will see immediate benefits to doing so. I don't think there is a regime on this planet that wants to be the next Iraq because they all saw what happened live on the news.
I pay as much attention to cricket as I do the price of grain in south korea, so I couldn't tell you.
But he is a cricket player, right?
If the cricket player you are talking about led the afghan resistance against the soviet invasion in the early to mid 80's.
Is he not a cricket player?
Today saw the so called 'movement to disarm' WOMD programmes in North Korea. I would take that with a pinch of salt.
Emperor Xerxes Q.C. wrote:
> Yeah thats right because the people must be evil. No country deserves
> to be carpet bombed unless in a fight for survival, otherwise
> tactical strikes and political insubordination/assassination will
> suffice.
If North Korea ever kicks off then Borat's right, it'll come down to bombing them into dust until they surrender - by which point there will be little left to surrender.
Bearing in mind North Korea's alleged nuclear capability it is likely, in my opinion, that should the North ever move against the South then the US and the South would immediately get forces in to reduce that nuclear capability to dust no matter the cost to troops or any civilians.
The North Korean people will not, in this event, rise up against their government, they'll only support it more because the state will demand it. It'd be Germany 1945 all over again, magnified a 100 times worse.
> Yeah thats right because the people must be evil. No country deserves
> to be carpet bombed unless in a fight for survival, otherwise
> tactical strikes and political insubordination/assassination will
> suffice.
If North Korea ever kicks off then Borat's right, it'll come down to bombing them into dust until they surrender - by which point there will be little left to surrender.
Bearing in mind North Korea's alleged nuclear capability it is likely, in my opinion, that should the North ever move against the South then the US and the South would immediately get forces in to reduce that nuclear capability to dust no matter the cost to troops or any civilians.
The North Korean people will not, in this event, rise up against their government, they'll only support it more because the state will demand it. It'd be Germany 1945 all over again, magnified a 100 times worse.
Page: