We all know that's because Zionism basically owns everything and controls everything, but that doesn't mean we have to stand idly by and take all that bullshit. I'm not gonna deviate and go on about Israel/Hezbollah/Palestine/whatever, and will conclude right away.
Yeah you Zion conspiracy theorists always crack me up. But you're right. We'll wrap this up since we're hardly discussing Korea anymore. Not that this thread was really discussing Korea in the first place.
Lol@the nuclear weapons count..and they're getting freaked out over fucking Iran. Man..hypocrisy.
I'm assuming by they you are referring to the U.S.
Of course the U.S. is concerned over North Korea having nuclear weapons. And I'll even admit it's hypocritical to say that Iran should not have nuclear weapons at all while Israel has one of the largest stockpiles of them next to Russia and the U.S., and also while it is okay for India to produce them even though they did not sign the non-proliferation treaty.
But just because we're concerned about North Korea having nuclear weapons, doesn't mean there's a damn thing we can do about it. For one thing, China would never allow the U.S. to invade North Korea. Even South Korea and Japan would never allow it. The U.S. more than ever right now is very beholden to China as a result of our trade relationships with them not to mention how much of our debt they own. In diplomatic meetings with China, regime change is an utter taboo. Neither China or South Korea wants to deal with the flood of refugees they would receive as a result of a war between the U.S. and North Korea. And it would easily be enough to totally disrupt that region's stability.
I suspect actually that in a way the U.S. is happy for North Korea because we know they are a thorn in China's side and since China has so insisted that North Korea is hands off, we let China deal with them. And constantly deal with them they must as North Korea already provides China with tons of illegal immigrants and Japan is constantly complaining over North Korea test firing their rockets over their seas and South Korea is easily within nuclear weapons range of North Korea's limited-range rockets.
Besides, you call it a hypocrisy that we make a fuss over Iran having nuclear weapons. Well, we make a fuss over North Korea having nuclear weapons as well. So what? It's politically popular for all politicians of any country to rail against nuclear proliferation. And we're all aware of the hypocrisy of being against nuclear weapons while owning them at the same time. I think deep down U.S. politicians are really embarrassed by this hyposcrisy. But nonetheless, as everyone in the world fears nuclear obliteration, why wouldn't any politician from the most local to national level say they are against another country acquiring nuclear weapons? It should be noted that at the same time, most these politicians also talk about reducing the number of nuclear weapons that they already own. Not that that makes any difference really. I mean, right now the U.S. alone owns enough nuclear weapons to turn the world into a glass ball about ten times over. So even if we reduced our nuclear weapons by half, well we can still turn the world into a glass ball five times over. So what's the point of reducing nuclear weapons until you can only reduce the planet into less of one glass ball?
I mean, nuclear weapons on the most practical level are nothing more than political weapons. And politics these days is more international than ever so I find it amusing when people are all, "Wwaaaaa, the U.S. has nuclear weapons! Oh the hypocrisy!" And I would agree with them that it is just that. But what's the point anymore of even complaining about it. This is just 21st century politics. Heck it's easily as old as 20th century politics.
My opinion is completely consenting of Mephisto's. I've only felt lately that making my voice heard on the issue is like throwing pebbles at freight trains.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Of course the U.S. is concerned over North Korea having nuclear weapons. And I'll even admit it's hypocritical to say that Iran should not have nuclear weapons at all while Israel has one of the largest stockpiles of them next to Russia and the U.S., and also while it is okay for India to produce them even though they did not sign the non-proliferation treaty.
But just because we're concerned about North Korea having nuclear weapons, doesn't mean there's a damn thing we can do about it. For one thing, China would never allow the U.S. to invade North Korea. Even South Korea and Japan would never allow it. The U.S. more than ever right now is very beholden to China as a result of our trade relationships with them not to mention how much of our debt they own. In diplomatic meetings with China, regime change is an utter taboo. Neither China or South Korea wants to deal with the flood of refugees they would receive as a result of a war between the U.S. and North Korea. And it would easily be enough to totally disrupt that region's stability.
I suspect actually that in a way the U.S. is happy for North Korea because we know they are a thorn in China's side and since China has so insisted that North Korea is hands off, we let China deal with them. And constantly deal with them they must as North Korea already provides China with tons of illegal immigrants and Japan is constantly complaining over North Korea test firing their rockets over their seas and South Korea is easily within nuclear weapons range of North Korea's limited-range rockets.
Besides, you call it a hypocrisy that we make a fuss over Iran having nuclear weapons. Well, we make a fuss over North Korea having nuclear weapons as well. So what? It's politically popular for all politicians of any country to rail against nuclear proliferation. And we're all aware of the hypocrisy of being against nuclear weapons while owning them at the same time. I think deep down U.S. politicians are really embarrassed by this hyposcrisy. But nonetheless, as everyone in the world fears nuclear obliteration, why wouldn't any politician from the most local to national level say they are against another country acquiring nuclear weapons? It should be noted that at the same time, most these politicians also talk about reducing the number of nuclear weapons that they already own. Not that that makes any difference really. I mean, right now the U.S. alone owns enough nuclear weapons to turn the world into a glass ball about ten times over. So even if we reduced our nuclear weapons by half, well we can still turn the world into a glass ball five times over. So what's the point of reducing nuclear weapons until you can only reduce the planet into less of one glass ball?
I mean, nuclear weapons on the most practical level are nothing more than political weapons. And politics these days is more international than ever so I find it amusing when people are all, "Wwaaaaa, the U.S. has nuclear weapons! Oh the hypocrisy!" And I would agree with them that it is just that. But what's the point anymore of even complaining about it. This is just 21st century politics. Heck it's easily as old as 20th century politics.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Siaynoq's Playthroughs