Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
Using Iraq to justify North Korea's actions is goddamn foolish.
|
How was I doing that? I wasn't.
The examples of Iraq AND AFGHANISTAN showed that your statement.
Quote:
|
The primary difference is, North Korea is known to be pretty agressive in military terms,
|
Was completely flawed as you were inferring that the difference between North Korea and the US and UK is that North Korea is 'pretty aggressive' and our two countries
are not, in terms of military.
Invading other countries IS aggressive military action. Therefore to say that the UK and US are not 'pretty aggressive' military forces is completely untrue.
I said nothing about the ethics involved in responding to a North Korean attack and the ethics behind allowing them, or stopping them, from developing nuclear weapons. Once again, what
ethical position are we in to argue against them developing and possessing weapons that we have already developed and already possess?
However, on a practical level its perfectly fine by me for our countries to threaten North Korea and stop them from developing advanced weapons, as it seems to be in own political interest to do so. I certainly don't believe that there would be anything righteous about doing so. Its just level-headed, businesslike selfishness.
Extremist liberal? Wtf??? When I say that I don't see why North Korea shouldn't be allowed to develop the same nukes we already have, I mean that on an international level I don't think it would be easy to argue against them having the nukes (any more so than you could argue against the other countries having them).