Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
first of all, the US isnt south korea. attacking south korea has absolutely nothing to do with the US.
Okay let me clarify then, when you said: "north korea hasnt attacked anybody"
You didn't really mean anybody in the common definition of the word, you meant a specific subset of people which somehow in your mind means they don't belong to anybody? I'd love to see you stand in front of the war memorial to the tens thousands dead in Seoul and explain how they aren't "anybody" so the North Korean invasion wasn't actually an attack on anybody. How about you explain to the families of people kidnapped from Japanese soil by North Korea that they don't count and North Korea hasn't attacked anybody? The terrorism attack by North Korean agents on flight 858 wasn't anybody?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
there has been a few issues but nothing to do with the US, nothing major and nothing recent. north korea is 100% not a problem for the american people.
Ahhh "issues" is what we are calling unprovoked attacks now when we declare they haven't attacked anybody? They've just created issues, they are simply victims.
Nothing recent? Bombardment of Yeonpyeong, 2010.
ROKS Cheonan sinking, 2010. 46 dead sailors with families, nah nothing major.
Where do you draw the line on recent? Let me guess, some vague line that is ahead of whatever unprovoked aggression North Korea has committed lately?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
that absolutely was murder. the iranian general was in iraq working with the iraqi government, the welcomed him there. he was working with the shiite militias that were primarily responsible with stopping ISIL. the US had absolutely not right to murder him. Iran is an ally of the iraqi government; im not so sure you can say the same about the US.
Fail. The US is in Iraq as an invitee by the government, and Soleimani had a long history of working with insurgent groups to target US forces.
A military soldier who facilitates attacks in a war zone is a legit target.
that absolutely was murder. the iranian general was in iraq working with the iraqi government, the welcomed him there. he was working with the shiite militias that were primarily responsible with stopping ISIL. the US had absolutely not right to murder him.
Good grief.
Those Hezbollah Shia militias, designated by multiple countries as a terrorist org, directly tied to Soleimani and the IRGC, financially supported by Iran, had also just attacked a U.S. manned air base (killing an American), and then the same militias had laid siege to the American embassy in Bagdad.
Okay let me clarify then, when you said: "north korea hasnt attacked anybody"
You didn't really mean anybody in the common definition of the word, you meant a specific subset of people which somehow in your mind means they don't belong to anybody? I'd love to see you stand in front of the war memorial to the tens thousands dead in Seoul and explain how they aren't "anybody" so the North Korean invasion wasn't actually an attack on anybody. How about you explain to the families of people kidnapped from Japanese soil by North Korea that they don't count and North Korea hasn't attacked anybody? The terrorism attack by North Korean agents on flight 858 wasn't anybody?
Ahhh "issues" is what we are calling unprovoked attacks now when we declare they haven't attacked anybody? They've just created issues, they are simply victims.
Nothing recent? Bombardment of Yeonpyeong, 2010.
ROKS Cheonan sinking, 2010. 46 dead sailors with families, nah nothing major.
Where do you draw the line on recent? Let me guess, some vague line that is ahead of whatever unprovoked aggression North Korea has committed lately?
Fail. The US is in Iraq as an invitee by the government, and Soleimani had a long history of working with insurgent groups to target US forces.
A military soldier who facilitates attacks in a war zone is a legit target.
honestly if you consider North Korea's attacks to be somehow requiring an international response then thats insane. sure, every government attacks people. the US government is constantly attacking innocent people but even decent government's have attacks. my point was that their attacks are very limited and of no concern to the US.
you dont like my use of the word recent? i wonder why you need to use 10 year low level attacks on another country or a war that was almost 70 years ago? you think that it bolsters your argument to use 10+ year old actions (that arent the world's issue) to justify present action? if these actions were so bad, then why not do something then? north korea hasnt done anything to warrant US concern and the fact that you cant think of recent actions that would warrant concern is further evidence of that.
im pretty sure that iraq has asked the us to leave. the only reason why any of them support US presence is because of the money that the US government gives to them. iraq certainly wasnt ok with the US government murdering a welcomed iranian general in their country. the iranian general was working with the Iraqi government to eliminate isis. the US isnt at war with iran, there was no justification for the US to start attacking iranians.
Those Hezbollah Shia militias, designated by multiple countries as a terrorist org, directly tied to Soleimani and the IRGC, financially supported by Iran, had also just attacked a U.S. manned air base (killing an American), and then the same militias had laid siege to the American embassy in Bagdad.
You somehow left all that out.
those militias are also in a country where they are welcome and doing things that iraq wanted help doing. the US has no business being in iraq. every single iraqi (or iranian) killed in iraq by the US government was and is a murder. its amazing that Americans actually believe their country is the "good guy" when it is killing people in another country that never attacked or posed a threat to the US. soleimani helped the iraqi government fight Isis. im not sure under what logic is it ok to pick off iranians in iraq at this time. would you be ok if iran killed a US general while he is visiting england?
nobody laid siege to the US embassy in baghdad (and why does the US have a billion dollar huge embassy complex in baghdad with thousands of employees anyway)? there was a protest there because the US military murdered a bunch of people and it got a little out of control. some minor damage was done to the facility with no casualties.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
