Gaming World Forums
General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: Draak on April 05, 2009, 04:40:47 am
-
In case anyone's interested, I know I am (don't like the concept of nuclear holocaust.) :shocking:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/04/04/north.korea.rocket/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
SEOUL, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea launched a long-range rocket Sunday in what U.S. and South Korean officials deemed a provocative act.
A recent satellite image shows a rocket sitting on its launch pad in northeast North Korea.
While the United States and South Korea confirmed the rocket launch, the payload of the rocket remained unclear. North Korea has said the rocket was to carry a satellite into space, but the United States, South Korea and other nations fear it could be a missile with a warhead attached.
"With this provocative act, North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint, and further isolated itself from the community of nations," U.S. President Barack Obama said in a statement.
"We will immediately consult with our allies in the region, including Japan and (South Korea), and members of the U.N. Security Council to bring this matter before the Council," Obama added. "I urge North Korea to abide fully by the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council and to refrain from further provocative actions."
A senior Obama administration official in Washington confirmed that the rocket did clear Japan.
Japan's chief Cabinet secretary told reporters after the launch that the country's military was not forced to intercept any missiles, which it had pledged to do if necessary.
Preliminary data show that two objects, likely boosters from the rocket, apparently fell around Japan, one in the Sea of Japan and one in the Pacific Ocean.
The rocket -- launched at about 11:30 a.m. local time on Sunday (2:30 a.m. GMT) -- was a "provocative act in violation" of U.N. Security Council resolution on North Korea's weapons program, Fred Lash, a State Department spokesman, told reporters.
An October 2006 resolution condemned North Korea for missile launches in the summer and a nuclear test that same month. Video Watch the debate about what North Korea is allowed to do »
The office of the South Korean president condemned the launch, calling it a "serious threat" to world peace, the state-run Yonhap news agency reported.
"We cannot withhold our regrets and disappointment that North Korea has caused such a serious threat to peace on the Korean Peninsula and in the world by firing a long-range rocket when the entire world is joining efforts to overcome the global economic crisis," Lee Dong-kwan, a presidential spokesman said, according to Yonhap.
On Friday, Obama reiterated that the United States strongly opposes any such launch.
"We have made it very clear to the North Koreans that their missile launch is provocative, it puts enormous strains on the six-party talks and that they should stop the launch," Obama said while on a stop in France.
Obama warned that the United States will join with its allies to take "appropriate steps" to let North Korea know it can't violate United Nations rules and get away with it.
Earlier Sunday, before the launch, South Korea's national security council called an emergency meeting amid concerns that a North Korean rocket launch was imminent, a presidential spokesperson said.
Also, Japan's representative to the United Nations, Yukio Takasu, sent a letter requesting an urgent Security Council meeting in response to the launch. The letter to Claude Heller, Mexico's representative and the current security council president, was sent minutes after news of the launch broke.
Western nations fear that North Korea plans a ballistic missile test rather than a satellite launch, but the Obama administration's special envoy to the six-party talks, Stephen Bosworth, said last week that it didn't matter if the North Koreans were trying to put a satellite in space or testing a ballistic missile that could threaten Japan or the United States.
"Whether it is a satellite launch or a missile launch, in our judgment makes no difference. It is a provocative act," Bosworth said.
Bosworth said the U.S. stands ready -- after a launch -- to participate in United Nations deliberations on new sanctions against North Korea.
advertisement
U.S. Rep. Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, issued a statement late Saturday.
"It is alarming that North Korea carried out this missile launch in direct defiance of the international community," Berman said. "The test is an unnecessary provocation that raises tensions in the region, and I urge the North Koreans to stop using their missile and WMD programs to threaten their neighbors and the rest of the world."
-
this is so dumb. if anyone thinks north korea is doing anything other than attention whoring they're stupid as fuck. no one would fire a single nuclear missile because their entire country would literally be obliterated in about 5 seconds by a retaliatory attack
-
its probably a satellite and besides north korea. i really did panic for one second before realizing this. as ryan said OH NO
A MISSILE!
-
rocket is named Dong btw, proceed with jokes.
-
If it was an actual missile then the moment it hits it would be considered a declaration of war right? They're pushing but they don't want to dance... yet.
Named Dong eh? Must be compensating for something. :fogetnaughty:
-
A representative of the UN had the following to say today about the launching of the Korean rocket over Japan on Sunday.
"What the North Koreans have done is considered a provocative act. They cannot just be running around shooting dongs off left and right like it doesn't matter, we have sanctions on these things for a reason; it just isn't safe. How would they know if the dong might be inoperable? it could fall onto someone's house for god's sake, then you'd have someone killed in their sleep by a giant dong. Not a good way to go out I'd say..."
-
a++++, great job north korea
those missiles are just making up for the fact they got no real dongs
gotta....gotta show them.........WE'VE....GOT.....DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONGS (that's the end of the world)
-
Supposedly, while North Korea does have the required plutonium to make a nuclear bomb, they do not have the technology to required to make a nuclear warhead. If it is being developed as a weapon, it makes me think it would not be a practical one.
-
You mean if they tried it'd blow up in their faces? As bad as an atomic/nuclear explosion is that'd still be hilarious.
-
How would North Korea benefit at all from a 'space program'?
-
Obama warned that the United States will join with its allies to take "appropriate steps" to let North Korea know it can't violate United Nations rules and get away with it.
lol
-
foot in the door as far as international legitimacy goes i think
-
How would North Korea benefit at all from a 'space program'?
communications etc. in the case of launching a satellite. They are also testing missile technology because they can make a lot of money selling long range missiles.
there's plenty of good economic and military reasons for the DPRK(or any country) to invest in a space program.
-
I saw a documentary on North Korea on National Geographic. I feel so bad for the people over there. But if NK thinks they could take on the U.S., then they are sadly mistaken.
-
lol
-
because we top dog
us in the HOOOUUUUSSEEEEE
we don't take no shit form no body
especially not no tiny yeller folk
fukin nuke them bitches right back into the gopher holes they crawled outta
-
LOL, you guys are hilarious.
-
WHAT ARE WE WAITIN FOR SENDT HE GODDAMN TANKS OVER THERE AND KILL THEM NILLA WAFERS
-
LOL, there's not reason too. They're so weak from starvation. All because their "Great Leader" won't feed them.
-
Coxswain and tsukuru stop posting here
-
communications etc. in the case of launching a satellite. They are also testing missile technology because they can make a lot of money selling long range missiles.
there's plenty of good economic and military reasons for the DPRK(or any country) to invest in a space program.
I figured that other countries would share their satellite usage with N.Korea for communications; they'd rather do that than let N.Korea launch shit. For instance, amateur radio satellites are used internationally as they orbit the earth -- so basically, communications satellites can be shared to some extent. But yeah, missile technology does make sense, because it seems to be the only thing the N.Korean government is putting money in. I didn't know it was salable though. That kinda scares me. Who's North Korea's market?
I think I just shit my pants.
-
I figured that other countries would share their satellite usage with N.Korea for communications; they'd rather do that than let N.Korea launch shit. For instance, amateur radio satellites are used internationally as they orbit the earth -- so basically, communications satellites can be shared to some extent. But yeah, missile technology does make sense, because it seems to be the only thing the N.Korean government is putting money in. I didn't know it was salable though. That kinda scares me. Who's North Korea's market?
I think I just shit my pants.
there are plenty of benefits to having your own national satellite, especially an isolated and secretive government like the DPRK. :welp: is it really that much of a mystery why a country like the DPRK would prefer not to rely on other country's satellites?
You don't really have anything to be scared of as far as missiles go. What would be the point? Nobody anywhere is going to launch a missile anywhere near you.
-
Yeh, makes sense. Fucked up world.
-
this is so dumb. if anyone thinks north korea is doing anything other than attention whoring they're stupid as fuck. no one would fire a single nuclear missile because their entire country would literally be obliterated in about 5 seconds by a retaliatory attack
Geez. Didn't you play Metal Gear Solid? This is what they meant when they said nuclear deterrence would no longer cut it when irresponsible nations become able to use the technology.
Seriously though, I don't think they have a viable nuclear program. The Manhattan Project cost about $24 billion in 2008 dollars. Even if they somehow managed to buy a bomb from a country that already has them (China or Russia) I sincerely doubt they'd be able to actually put them to use. There's too much knowledge required and they don't exactly come with an instructions manual.
Like you say, it's a card that will allow them more weight on the international stage.
-
North Korea has successfully tested a nuclear bomb in '06 so there's no question that they have it. The problem for them is that it's unlikely they could have miniaturized one to fit in a missile/rocket warhead
-
North Korea has successfully tested a nuclear bomb in '06 so there's no question that they have it. The problem for them is that it's unlikely they could have miniaturized one to fit in a missile/rocket warhead
I heard that the detonation failed, and it couldn't be classified as a nuclear bomb. Anyway, wtf is Kim Jong thinking? They have a terrible military, and would probably get decimated if a country invaded. They are like that annoying kid who acts all tough and makes fun of people, but if someone ever retaliated, would get the shit beaten out of him. Let's just hope he is taken out of power before nukes start getting into play here.
-
Geez. Didn't you play Metal Gear Solid? This is what they meant when they said nuclear deterrence would no longer cut it when irresponsible nations become able to use the technology.
Seriously though, I don't think they have a viable nuclear program. The Manhattan Project cost about $24 billion in 2008 dollars. Even if they somehow manage to buy a bomb from a country that already has them (China or Russia) I sincerely doubt they'd be able to actually put them to use. There's too much knowledge required and they don't exactly come with an instructions manual.
Like you say, it's a card that will allow them more weight on the international stage.
Yea, but the Manhattan Project was inventing PLUS creation of a nuclear bomb.... I think it would be much cheaper to build one off of some blueprints. Heck you can get the blueprints to create a nuke off of google lol.
-
I heard that the detonation failed, and it couldn't be classified as a nuclear bomb. Anyway, wtf is Kim Jong thinking? They have a terrible military, and would probably get decimated if a country invaded. They are like that annoying kid who acts all tough and makes fun of people, but if someone ever retaliated, would get the shit beaten out of him. Let's just hope he is taken out of power before nukes start getting into play here.
jesus christ would you listen? even if kim jong il did decide to fire off a nuke
A) wouldnt be able to reach much farther than japan or mainland china
B) the korean peninsula would literally be wiped off the map by a US, Chinese, or Russian retaliatory attack
believe it or not, even CRAZY, MANIAC, POWER HUNGRY dictators and whatnot are at least logical enough to not fire off a single (or hell, even several) nuclear missile(s). the reason the soviet union was the only real nuclear threat at the time was because they had enough to actually win a nuclear exchange, and even that may be debatable.
-
jesus christ would you listen? even if kim jong il did decide to fire off a nuke
A) wouldnt be able to reach much farther than japan or mainland china
B) the korean peninsula would literally be wiped off the map by a US, Chinese, or Russian retaliatory attack
believe it or not, even CRAZY, MANIAC, POWER HUNGRY dictators and whatnot are at least logical enough to not fire off a single (or hell, even several) nuclear missile(s). the reason the soviet union was the only real nuclear threat at the time was because they had enough to actually win a nuclear exchange, and even that may be debatable.
I understand that, but it also causes a problem. What if they hypothetically attacked a country (IE: South Korea) using normal means (Infantry, Navy, Air). Would a country risk attacking N.K. in retaliation with the risk of getting Nuked?
-
considering there's like 50,000 US troops in South Korea i don't (hypothetically) think that would happen, either.
-
I heard that the detonation failed, and it couldn't be classified as a nuclear bomb. Anyway, wtf is Kim Jong thinking? They have a terrible military, and would probably get decimated if a country invaded. They are like that annoying kid who acts all tough and makes fun of people, but if someone ever retaliated, would get the shit beaten out of him. Let's just hope he is taken out of power before nukes start getting into play here.
The north korean military is one of the largest in the world and seismic data along with traces of radioactive gasses measured in the region indicated that a small scale underground nuclear explosion was successful.
The DPRK has an official policy of self reliance and preservation. If you look at everything the country has done from that perspective, it makes a lot more sense than the juvenile caricature you seem to have in your head. North korea isn't led by a bunch of crazy idiots.
-
No they probably won't fire a nuclear weapon, but I guarantee you that they'll be political pissants in the next decade or so. They'll want to be recognized as a world power. Not that I'm touting US hegemony, but their political interests might be a threat to us. I wouldn't be surprised if they made good with China and Russia, and joined BRIC. The world is definitely taking a multipolar turn, to the United States' and the Big 7(?)'s loss.
-
How would north koreas political interests be a threat to us?
They haven't made any direct threats and the only way you could see them as a threat would be from a position of supporting US hegemony.
-
hey guys i took a class on this and guess what the main fear isn't actually kim jong il firing off nuclear missiles. it's the possibility that they'll use nuclear-equipped tactical artillery on major population centers (think bunker busters except from a cannon), which takes a lot less technical skill and they may be crazy enough to do since it's far less destructive than actual nuclear missiles.
-
N-nande?!? Nuculearu???!?
-
How would north koreas political interests be a threat to us?
They haven't made any direct threats and the only way you could see them as a threat would be from a position of supporting US hegemony.
The BRIC entity (the economies and the political ties between Brazil, Russia, India and China) would be a threat to US hegemony. But I misread an article -- South Korea's looking to join BRIC, not North Korea. BRIC's actually working to take care of North Korea's nuclear program, according to [http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/first-bric-foreign-ministers-meeting-friday_10047983.html]. At any rate, the economic growth of BRIC has seen unprecedented rates and their collective GDP is expected to surpass the Big 7's in 2020. Not to mention that they are politically at odds against the United States, a behavior instigated by Putin. I don't know if Medvedev will continue vying for global multipolarity, but things aren't looking good for our "hegemony."
You're right though, it would be a threat if they were to support our hegemony. Hahaha.
-
Dong with a hard-sounding "d" is a vulgar way of saying "poop" in korean, with a softer d, its a common name for a male
-
A Poem To The Song Of Healing By ColdFlameZero.
Day to night, dark to light,
Fall the sands of time.
Let the years like the gears
Of a clock unwind
In your mind walk through time
Back to better days.
Memories, like a dream,
Wash your tears away.
Like a star in the sky darkness can't reach you.
Light the night, joy is light 'til the new dawn.
Cast away your old face
Full of gloom and spite.
With this mask I will ask
To borrow your light.
-
Yeah it was basically a gigantic failure. There's been no debris falling on Japan, nothing entered orbit, and the entire payload, whatever it truly was........ fell into the ocean. but it did get the entire world going OH ME OH MY!!!
-
Didn't they like fire some missiles named dong a few years ago? I checked some Swedish news-site yesterday
and the only coverage they had about North Korea was an article about Kim Jong and how photos of him are
most likely photoshopped to make him look taller haha. That's Sweden for you.
-
Whose dick you gotta suck to fire an ICBM around here?
-
NUKE EM, DAMN YOU US OF A ARE CRAZY SON OF BITCHES. YOUS AND YOUR MILITARY ARE SO HARDCORE. LOL.
US States are so obsessed when they themselves are also a threat to other nations, if North Korea is replaced by none other then Obama Bin Laden.
-
NUKE EM, DAMN YOU US OF A ARE CRAZY SON OF BITCHES. YOUS AND YOUR MILITARY ARE SO HARDCORE. LOL.
US States are so obsessed when they themselves are also a threat to other nations, if North Korea is replaced by none other then Obama Bin Laden.
That's great since people aren't saying this except you.
-
NUKE EM, DAMN YOU US OF A ARE CRAZY SON OF BITCHES. YOUS AND YOUR MILITARY ARE SO HARDCORE. LOL.
US States are so obsessed when they themselves are also a threat to other nations, if North Korea is replaced by none other then Obama Bin Laden.
This is painful to read-- the lack of a thought-process, in any form, is nothing short of staggering.
We may be a threat to other nations- wait, what nations?
Who are we a threat to other than Middle Easterners?
I mean, I know that's a bit cold to say, but really. If someone's a shade of yellow and darker, then we're a threat. Until then, we tend to be a fair bit more diplomatic.
What you're spouting (and I use spouting very appropriately, as it seems that you strung those words and letters together as if by random happen-stance) is utter nonsense, as we've never just "bombed for the sake of bombing."
We might have acted on misinformation after 9/11, but it was in response to what was a deemed a "threat to the military AND civilian population."
It's like getting hit with a rock on the playground.
If you're PISSED OFF ENOUGH, you just hit whoever seems most likely to have thrown it.
You can bash the US all they want, but when your country is in the shit, they tend to save your sorry ass.
-
This is painful to read-- the lack of a thought-process, in any form, is nothing short of staggering.
We may be a threat to other nations- wait, what nations?
Who are we a threat to other than Middle Easterners?
I mean, I know that's a bit cold to say, but really. If someone's a shade of yellow and darker, then we're a threat. Until then, we tend to be a fair bit more diplomatic.
What you're spouting (and I use spouting very appropriately, as it seems that you strung those words and letters together as if by random happen-stance) is utter nonsense, as we've never just "bombed for the sake of bombing."
We might have acted on misinformation after 9/11, but it was in response to what was a deemed a "threat to the military AND civilian population."
It's like getting hit with a rock on the playground.
If you're PISSED OFF ENOUGH, you just hit whoever seems most likely to have thrown it.
You can bash the US all they want, but when your country is in the shit, they tend to save your sorry ass.
i think you're seriously underplaying some things here. we have a long history of being places we do not belong. just saying we "acted on misinformation" is a gross understatement. we've been at war with Iraq for years; 200,000+ civilian casualties. not to mention all the people in pakistan we've killed
and whose ass have we saved?? im confused.
-
This is painful to read-- the lack of a thought-process, in any form, is nothing short of staggering.
We may be a threat to other nations- wait, what nations?
Who are we a threat to other than Middle Easterners?
I mean, I know that's a bit cold to say, but really. If someone's a shade of yellow and darker, then we're a threat. Until then, we tend to be a fair bit more diplomatic.
What you're spouting (and I use spouting very appropriately, as it seems that you strung those words and letters together as if by random happen-stance) is utter nonsense, as we've never just "bombed for the sake of bombing."
We might have acted on misinformation after 9/11, but it was in response to what was a deemed a "threat to the military AND civilian population."
It's like getting hit with a rock on the playground.
If you're PISSED OFF ENOUGH, you just hit whoever seems most likely to have thrown it.
You can bash the US all they want, but when your country is in the shit, they tend to save your sorry ass.
:fogetcool:
hit hte nail on the head buddy. keep posting! :woop: :woop: :woop:
-
i think you're seriously underplaying some things here. we have a long history of being places we do not belong. just saying we "acted on misinformation" is a gross understatement. we've been at war with Iraq for years; 200,000+ civilian casualties. not to mention all the people in pakistan we've killed
and whose ass have we saved?? im confused.
Over half of Europe in World War II, not to mention the fact that our presence alone often acts as a deterrent of war.
I'm not saying that the United States deserves much of glory that it gets, but the fact remains: Without the United States, a lot of foreign policy would be policy anymore. It'd be THE LAW governed by a DICTATOR.
Sure, they do a lot of REALLY BAD THINGS. But--
The US has saved the world countless times, and I hate to admit that, but it's the truth.
-
dude, I don't understand your posts. Assuming the US has saved the world countless times, why would you "hate to admit that"? Do you hate the United States? Would this be a cause for embarrassment?
I am very bad at history but
not to mention the fact that our presence alone often acts as a deterrent of war.
lol
-
Considering the U.S. accounts for about 47% of the world's total military spending, I'd say they're pretty damn influential in foreign policies.
-
dude, I don't understand your posts. Assuming the US has saved the world countless times, why would you "hate to admit that"? Do you hate the United States? Would this be a cause for embarrassment?
I am very bad at history but
lol
I'm not saying I'm fond of all of the US policies, be it diplomatic or military.
But, I do feel that to assume we're always on a high horse is a bit unrealistic, and somewhat offensive.
Certainly, our leaders to make piss-poor to downright stupid choices, but I feel that saying we're self-obsessed is erroneous. More often than not, our influence/presence in other countries is necessary, and usually for the sake of said "other country"
-
and whose ass have we saved?? im confused.
good, white, christian babbies
-
I'm not saying I'm fond of all of the US policies, be it diplomatic or military.
But, I do feel that to assume we're always on a high horse is a bit unrealistic, and somewhat offensive.
Certainly, our leaders to make piss-poor to downright stupid choices, but I feel that saying we're self-obsessed is erroneous. More often than not, our influence/presence in other countries is necessary, and usually for the sake of said "other country"
i have a hard time thinking of many (if any) examples where america served primarily to keep the peace without some sort of ulterior motive dude. please, enlighten me, cuz im coming up dry.
also WW2 was def. the most popular war we've ever been a part of but there's more to it then just SAAAAVE THE JEWS. genocide is happening like........ all the time. we really don't act unless we've got some profit in mind!!
-
WW2 had nothing to do with stopping the holocaust, btw.
-
iirc the US had very little to do with fighting the Nazis in general (if anything)
but yeah the US has done plenty of good things, but they just HAPPENED to be helpful, all of them were in the US's own interest, it was just an added bonus that it was helping out to make us look good
did you think the marshall plan was because we just felt like helping out because we're so good?????
-
iirc the US had very little to do with fighting the Nazis in general (if anything)
what? the US had a significant role in the downfall of the Nazis.
and the marshall plan was to quell the large gains socialist and communist parties were getting in western european elections following WW2
-
iirc the US had very little to do with fighting the Nazis in general (if anything)
The US really just kind of brushed aside the beleaguered German armies in France at the end of the war and pushed them out of the France, the low countries and Western Germany. They did fight in Africa and Italy as well though, and although arguably the Brits could have won without them there's no denying they sped things up, which was crucial considering the fact that the Reds were killing supermen at an alarming rate. If the US hadn't entered the European theatre there is a good chance the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Austria and maybe even Italy would have had communist governments (or governments-in-exile) and West Germany wouldn't have existed at all.
Some people will claim the Germans were a hard fight in France, but there is no denying they were ready to be knocked over by anyone willing to engage them on even terms for more than a couple hours.
Anyways the US did save most of the Pacific from being controlled by the Japanese, although they did a pretty crummy job on the mainland ("should we help the Nationalists fight the Communists? naw what harm can a couple of red Chinese do?" "oh dang, we forgot about Korea"). Now we have the PRC and North Korea, and we also have the Vietnamese police action (not a war guys, right? :fogetshifty:) do remember their amazing legacy by!
Does anyone remember the Wind and the Lion starring Brian Keith as Teddy Roosevelt and Sean Connery as the Raisuli? That is how the US should handle it's foreign policy. Have a bunch of Marines in dress uniform run up to their enemies, shoot them in the face while the rest of the world watches, and then leave. Good ol' Teddy Roosevelt. He would have ended the war on terror in no time flat. He'd also have Osama stuffed and put on display in the Smithsonian when he was finished with him.
edit: it sounds like I'm ragging on the US but international politics is pretty hard so they've done a pretty good job, all things considered. I do think that the US has had a major impact on the foreign policies of every other nation on the Earth since WW2, though, just because they exist. It's a hard thing not to take into consideration!
-
teddy roosevelt was a horrible person.
also you're forgetting that while the USA had a considerably easier time taking western europe as opposed to the soviets taking eastern europe (theres no doubt that the soviets were fighting the majority of the nazi military) they were supplying the vast majority of equipment and supplies. iirc at the peak of US industrial production during WWII us factories were producing more than germany, britain, and the ussr combined.
-
lol this fuckin' topic
-
This is painful to read-- the lack of a thought-process, in any form, is nothing short of staggering.
We may be a threat to other nations- wait, what nations?
Who are we a threat to other than Middle Easterners?
I mean, I know that's a bit cold to say, but really. If someone's a shade of yellow and darker, then we're a threat. Until then, we tend to be a fair bit more diplomatic.
What you're spouting (and I use spouting very appropriately, as it seems that you strung those words and letters together as if by random happen-stance) is utter nonsense, as we've never just "bombed for the sake of bombing."
We might have acted on misinformation after 9/11, but it was in response to what was a deemed a "threat to the military AND civilian population."
It's like getting hit with a rock on the playground.
If you're PISSED OFF ENOUGH, you just hit whoever seems most likely to have thrown it.
You can bash the US all they want, but when your country is in the shit, they tend to save your sorry ass.
ok you are simply spouting (and my use of 'spouting' is quite adept, as you are repeating the S sound) tripe. a reason the US is dangerous is because it's people think south korea having a missile would mean the pentagon could undergo some major renovations soon. the logistics of sending a missile across the globe without it being detected in enough time to be intercepted are prohibitive, that's why people hijack your planes with box cutters.
a single nuke wouldn't do much anyway, the nuclear weapon may be the most powerful but a single bomb is nowhere near able to wipe out a nation in the blink of an eye; russia and the us have thousands of them.
the us are the badguys. thanks for saving us in ww2 dudes, we'd be toast if it weren't for you! thanks for your banana republics and the mess your stationed soldiers cause! thanks for your super capitalist ultra democratic exploitation of third world labor! thanks for causing death and conflict world wide! boy compared to you our asses sure are sorry!
-
climbtree juss styled on a motherfucker
-
i never know whats a tru climbtree post or a trollpost. he already trolld himself into oblivion
-
fuck your cuntries, I live in the nation of god
-
i never know whats a tru climbtree post or a trollpost. he already trolld himself into oblivion
i don't exist outside of language heh heh
not too sure what's wrong with the post though! a nation like south korea is not going to fight with america to simply chip away at the capitalist ideology or to threaten democracy or freedom or whatever else and the public has gotten this impression as a result of the US military's public relations turning every war into a moral question rather than an economic one
-
you were serious? i could've sworn that was a troll.
oh man
-
i still think its a troll. when does climbtree talk about capitalisms. go away troll
-
climbtree you're getting me real fuckin hard right now
-
*kicks back in his nikes, sips a coke on his ibm* trolled em hard this time
-
I hereby declare that today, April 11th, will henceforth be known as "thank America day".
Here is the commemorative anthem:
http://tedbarron.com/BWF-February-2009/07-Are-You-Glad-to%20Be-in-America.mp3
-
Thanks for fucking up the global economy, America!
-
ok you are simply spouting (and my use of 'spouting' is quite adept, as you are repeating the S sound) tripe. a reason the US is dangerous is because it's people think south korea having a missile would mean the pentagon could undergo some major renovations soon. the logistics of sending a missile across the globe without it being detected in enough time to be intercepted are prohibitive, that's why people hijack your planes with box cutters.
a single nuke wouldn't do much anyway, the nuclear weapon may be the most powerful but a single bomb is nowhere near able to wipe out a nation in the blink of an eye; russia and the us have thousands of them.
the us are the badguys. thanks for saving us in ww2 dudes, we'd be toast if it weren't for you! thanks for your banana republics and the mess your stationed soldiers cause! thanks for your super capitalist ultra democratic exploitation of third world labor! thanks for causing death and conflict world wide! boy compared to you our asses sure are sorry!
WELL THEN LETS DO IT MO FUCKAS
pump up the volume, dance, dance.
-
globalization is gonna fuck the third world so hard
-
if i didn't live in america i wouldn't have the world's largest commercially available HDTV
-
globalization is gonna fuck the third world so hard
it already has. the third world is actually past the hump in that respect.
-
if i didn't live in america i wouldn't have the world's largest commercially available HDTV
you probably would and you'd be more aware of why you wanted it
-
you probably would and you'd be more aware of why you wanted it
I think the reason is pretty clear no matter what country you live in?
Reason being: "I want to watch a big damn tv with clear-ass picture quality".
-
ahahahahahahahahahahahhaahaha
-
you probably would and you'd be more aware of why you wanted it
i think i understand you better than rajew but i'm still curious as to what exactly you meant!
-
not too sure what's wrong with the post though! a nation like south korea is not going to fight with america to simply chip away at the capitalist ideology or to threaten democracy or freedom or whatever else and the public has gotten this impression as a result of the US military's public relations turning every war into a moral question rather than an economic one
Not sure if we established this was a troll post or not but you're ragging on the wrong Korea pal, the South is full of America-loving capitalists who (according to a guy I went to high school with) have, to a person (100%, he said) had eye surgery to make them look Western.
Also to reply to Ryan earlier: the USA's industrial production didn't trump the combined industry of the UK, the USSR and Germany, but it did trump any of those individually (especially Germany, who had been bombed into nothingness). Don't forget the Russians built the same number of tanks on their own as the entire allied world did and at least as many aircraft. Soviet industry at the end of the war was ridiculous. Admittedly they weren't worrying too much about things like "consumer goods" or "basic necessities" but they were damn good at assembly line production. The USA did of course trump them in every way that mattered and provided what the allies knew as the "Arsenal of Democracy", but I don't think it's fair the USA every gets to make mention of saving anyone from the Nazis in WW2 when the Soviets don't get to ever (with good reason of course, but they did do a lot of legwork!).
One of the big differences between the USA and other countries at the time that let them dominate the world's industry (a strategy that the Chinese have now adopted) is that rather than have all of their industry contained in industrial centers (like the Ruhr valley in Germany, or Sverdlosk-Tankograd in Russia, or all of North England or East Japan) they supplemented big ol' industrial complexes with a factory in pretty much every city. The lifeblood of many US cities was a single factory or a raw resource that directly fueled a factory somewhere else in the US, which is one of the reasons the US economy has changed so much thanks to overseas production. Now China has a factory or ten in every city fueling their lifeblood and it's the major reason they exert so much control in the manufacturing sector.
-
south korea north korea vietnam they're all the same (honest error actually)
i think i understand you better than rajew but i'm still curious as to what exactly you meant!
american advertising is horrifying. their are teams of people who think about every aspect of a product and how to make it appeal to your desires, concious but mainly unconcious. this is one of the reasons why a lot of the 'best' products are so expensive, teams of dudes analysing everything. mtv spends a huge amount on research for instance, and they're a group that's only indirectly out for your dollar.
-
american advertising is horrifying. their are teams of people who think about every aspect of a product and how to make it appeal to your desires, concious but mainly unconcious. this is one of the reasons why a lot of the 'best' products are so expensive, teams of dudes analysing everything. mtv spends a huge amount on research for instance, and they're a group that's only indirectly out for your dollar.
This is one of your troll posts, correct?
-
he is trolling but he's doing it with the truth
-
they're adapting......to the environment...
-
he is trolling but he's doing it with the truth
Yeah I mean what he says is true but still.
Thanks for the information climbtree.
-
yo from 1-10 how much of a problem will it be long-term that america is mostly a service industry nowadays
-
american advertising is horrifying. their are teams of people who think about every aspect of a product and how to make it appeal to your desires, concious but mainly unconcious.
yes. this is only american advertising.
-
(https://legacy.gamingw.net/etc/farm1.static.flickr.com/4/8139764_1d0225e2ce.jpeg)
niagra falls
-
if you wanted an example of non-american shit niagara is probably not the best choice
-
yes. this is only american advertising.
MGM
the incredible hulk
world wrestling federation
marvel
you're right canadian advertising is much more subtle, i can't spot a single canadian company or product.
-
MGM
the incredible hulk
world wrestling federation
marvel
you're right canadian advertising is much more subtle, i can't spot a single canadian company or product.
i can't think of a single canadian company or product. except for tim hortons.
-
i am 100% sure thsat whoever named the missile dong knew what dong means in american
-
You are what you eat.. that street in Niagara is so :blarg: