Should the USA be the World's Policeman

[Sir Taliesin]

[quote]Originally posted by Chewbacca:

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman: [qb] Whatever, it is a mess. Recent news from South Korea's Goverment says the U.S. has been pushing them for a military offensive, which they opposed. South Korea's reconcillitory policies of recent times shows that the U.S. is somewhat out of touch with what our ally wants.

According to the latest news, that not what the New South Korean President meant. He was referring to media reports that the US was planning an attack against North Korea. Apparently the US government never came out and pressured the South to go on a military offensive.

Here is a link! http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...0-1-2003_pg7_1

I also seem to recall hearing this weekend that Bill Clinton got into an arguement with the former South Korean President in 1994. Seems Slick Willy wanted to strike North Korea's nuclear weapons sites. Looks like he wanted to swing that big ole stick he was carrying, instead of speaking softly!

[Timber Loftis]

The more I read the sicker I get of Jong il. He's a childish puppetmaster in a land of the powerless. Plus, his taste in fashion sucks.

[Ar-Cunin]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: The more I read the sicker I get of Jong il. He's a childish puppetmaster in a land of the powerless. Plus, his taste in fashion sucks.

Small details - firstly: In Korea the name Kim Jong-Il means that Kim is the last name and Jong-Il the first name(s).
secondly: He is called the 'Dear Leader' by 'his' people. [img]smile.gif[/img]

EDIT: Dear Leader - not Dead Leader [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

[ 01-20-2003, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Ar-Cunin ]

Originally posted by Ar-Cunin: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: The more I read the sicker I get of Jong il. He's a childish puppetmaster in a land of the powerless. Plus, his taste in fashion sucks.

Small details - firstly: In Korea the name Kim Jong-Il means that Kim is the last name and Jong-Il the first name(s).
secondly: He is called the 'Dear Leader' by 'his' people. [img]smile.gif[/img]

EDIT: Dear Leader - not Dead Leader [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

Ar-Cunin, have you actually talked to any of the people who call him dear leader? and are you sure they aren't saying Dear God take our Leader? I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has actually been to North Korea and spoken to common people. The only guy I know of who has was in Clintons delegation to NK, and he doesn't believe that the people love their leader all that much...but he is a US civilian/politician so you can only give him so much trust..he did work for Clinton after all [/QUOTE]

[Chewbacca]

Clinton got the North Koreans to agree to non-proliferation. For all intents and purposes, and as far as I know, they played along until Bush came along. Also how will we win over the North Korean people by further alienating them as a "rouge" nation? Considering U.S. seems ready to deal it is all a mute point and off topic.

BACK ON TOPIC:

The American Military should leave the Korean pennisula as a direct action to influence peace and stability in the region. Not only will it save us a bunch of money that our cities and states need right now, but we will totally demonstrate our lack of concern with invading North Korea. North Korea would have no need more need for Nukes, unless they invent a new "threat" to their security.

American security and prosperity at home, where it counts most, will be enhanced by the resources made availble. That is why America should not be the "policeman" of the world as far as our far-reaching military goes. We can't afford it while our borders are so pourous and so many families are living in the street.

Just my opinion.

[Zoltan]

usa can't be world's policeman. They strike countries only for their own gain. That's all they think about. War is something terrible. I hope you feel the same way and there's a strong public opinion against bush. You already pollute world with your fat greasy food culture and stupid pop music. What's next?

[Davros]

Originally posted by Zoltan: usa can't be world's policeman. They strike countries only for their own gain. That's all they think about. War is something terrible. I hope you feel the same way and there's a strong public opinion against bush. You already pollute world with your fat greasy food culture and stupid pop music. What's next?

Interesting crusade you are starting here Zoltan - what has bought this on all of a sudden?

"That's all they think about", and "You already pollute world with your fat greasy food culture and stupid pop music." are not elements of discussion or debate - they are villification. If you have a message to send then I defend your right to say it - but keep it within the TOS - the above look to me to be intended to start a flame war.

[Iron_Ranger]

Why do it in a month and half old topic anyway?

[Zoltan]

answer this.
usa will attack iraq for oil and own benefits.
am I wrong?
please answer this question.
The whole world knows the answer!
Say NO to war!

[Davros]

Originally posted by Zoltan: answer this. usa will attack iraq for oil and own benefits. am I wrong? please answer this question. The whole world knows the answer! Say NO to war!

I won't answer the question because it is not my place, but I will answer the answer. "Say NO to war" is a great ethic to live by, but it loses its practicality because it only works if EVERYONE does it. Having said that does not make me a war monger - it makes me a realist - the sad reality being that for the foreseeable future, war will always remain the last resort.

Am I in support of unified UN action - YES. Am I in support of a US led coalition that is not 100% endorsed by the security council - only if I see much more of the evidence (no Colin has not convinced me yet) and am convinced that Saddam is thumbing his nose at the world. Am I in support for a war for oil - NO.

I am wondering if this thread can be kept clean for long?