North Korea is a communist country, they hate the U.S.A, they have nuclear weapons.

The General of Vietnam in 1975 said "if it wasn't for these guys (Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War) we would have lost."

I Vote Kerry because he's a democrat. Look at how badly we are off when a Republican is in office. The fucking statistics don't lie, they give us a little money from tax breaks, then they fucking do some stupid shit and ruin our economy. Look at Clinton, he had the economy going great, keeping out of wars, Smokin the peace pipe with many nations. Then gay ass Bush comes in here, we (get attacked) Then we go to war with Afghanistan. (88 billion dollar war). Then we go to Iraq, (800 billion dollar war). Now our economy is shot, gas prices going up, our reputation as a nation is shitty, and everything is out of line. Bush's time is up, get him the fuck outta office.

That would be the perfect justification if you were a playground bully, but that in no means justifies a millitary advancement into North Korea. China is a communist country with nuclear weapons, but we aren't attacking them. Plus, a large part of the world hates the USA. So again, how is it that attacking North Korea would be justified?

We aren't the sole country with the rights to nuclear arms. We can not make political blunders simply because we feel threatend. Going to war with them for that reason would make no sense whatsoever. That's like a country coming into the USA and telling us we aren't allowed to have nuclear weapons. As you have already guessed, that would most likely spark a war, most likely a nuclear war, and we all know the reprecussions to that. Attacking North Korea for that reason would simply make the United States a power-hungry warmonger.

Albeit a small one, there is a communist party in the USA. Why don't we dissolve them? Because we are a democracy, and they have the right to express whatever political views they want to. Going to war with North Korea would just be forcing our political views upon them. Now, if I recall correctly from my social studies class, America was founded by the pilgrims because they were being opressed from expressing their views. Going over to North Korea and forcibly making them a capitalistic democracy, simply because we can, would be a quintessential demonstration of hypocrisy, and an indirect attack on what this country stands for.

Even if everything you said correctly justified going to war, why wouldn't we do the same thing to China? They are also an evil :rolleyes: communist country, but we have made no encroachment upon their territory. So why North Korea, and not China? Asserting something on a much weaker country, and then not doing the same thing on another country that would require much more of a struggle is "being a pussy," as some have so eloquently called me for saying anything against this frivolous, over-done depredation in Iraq. Going into North Korea would be even worse.

Very well said, mjordan2nd. If you support a republican because YOU'RE a republican, or a democrat for president as you're a democrat yourself, then you deserve to starve to death, chained to a tree root far below surface level.

Really, I think the best idea to run a nation would be via full democracy. Give everyone a chance to vote in ALL matters, and establish a large council to count the votes in public. Yes, let the people do the decisions of the "president". There wouldn't *be* anyone in power, or tops, some powerless person involved in political matters who can only talk about the nation's greatness without an ability to change anything. Look into how the monarchy system works in the Scandinavian nation for more information about this. If anyone would be corrupt in the vote-counting council, it would very likely be reported. Human fallacy. It's *much* safer than giving a closed presidential administration practically full power to run a multi-million population nation.

Since computers are common and available to just about anyone, all that would be needed would be to distribute an iris scanner to all users in order to allow unique identification of everyone, to let them vote. This system would be very hard to cheat if established well, but unfortunately, conservatists (such as, a majority of the US population whether you like it or not) would never support this idea.

Actually, I have a prime example of what could go wrong when a "big happy box of politics" is chosen. Remember what happened during the early 20th century in Germany? The National Socialists offered a remedy that would take care of the poverty caused by the Versailles treaty. Of course, this great help from the party required the "weak in society" to be blamed, but hey, if it patches the horrendous, suicide-inducing economy and they will make our nation strong once again, it's not so bad, is it? That's what people thought. Kind of like the supporters of a president in the US. You see so many great qualities in a president, that the bad sides can be ignored. He's still THE guy to support, right? I mean, the other candidate is REALLY an utter moron.

Well, we all know what happened in nazi Germany. I'm not saying that the US will turn out to be a modern version of that atrocity, but I'm very well saying it can and WILL have some consequences that won't conform with the will of the US population, no matter who gets elected. But who knows, maybe millions will die if, say, Bush decides to invade North Korea. The destruction of another Communist nation may look great. But will it be worth the price of an atrocious genocide?

I hate when ignorant people try and talk Kerry down. They talk about how he wants to make cuts from this stupid ass war. And he wants to cut some of the defensive budget. But do you know why? HE WANTS TO IMPROVE OUR COUNTRY. Not waste all of that money into a defensive system which is not needed. Look how many times we've been attacked after 9/11 ..... NONE. If you count Anthrax , well that was an american who did that, so blah.

John Kerry has a good plan for the states, and We've already seen how shitty of a job Bush has done, Put us in Debt, get the whole world to hate americans, Our fucking popularity has gone down like 32% since Bush came in off. See, Bush doesn' tlike to listen to the U.N. ... If we would have let them go in , check for the ''''weapons of mass destruction''''' then We wouldn't have had any of the problems. But his war hungriness led to this.

Ok MJ lets stear away from the "Lets please the rest of the world instead of ourselves" reason and go onto something more urgent, the fact that North Korea's Leader Kim is starving his people and has active torture chambers. Or the fact that he threatens South Korea's Capital Seol once a month with a nuclear attack. Or if thats not enough the fact that Kim's army is digging under ground tunnels thrue South Korea in preperation for a future invasion. But I can understand, your way to imbeded with the rest of the "lets all be against Bush cuzz he actually did something!" crowd to give a damn about the kids in North Korea that work 12 hours a day and resemble a walking stick while their "harmless leader" and his devote zealots live a luxuroius life style while their people starve to death. John Kerry is a hypocrite, he claims that there are "Benedict Arnold companies" in the US, yet, he benefits from his wifes Hienz Ketchup company who is a major out sourcer.

Ok then MJ, let's just sit around and wait for them to nuke us. Did you not read it very well? THEY HATE US AND THEY HAVE NUKES. 2+2=NUKED.

Woops, forgot the whole point of this thread. Neither Bush or Kerry are pleasing me too much right now, but I'd take Bush over Kerry any day. He knows how to get things done the right way and he does them. Democrats are teh sux.

Kim is digging underground tunnels and threatens South Korea with a nuclear strike every month? I'd like to see your source for that information, zagggon.

!King_Amazon!, as far as I know, the range of the North Korean nukes is unknown. And once again, wouldn't it be BETTER if everything worked out like DDR in '89? The two instances are very similar; only the scale of the conflict in the Koreas is far greater. And honestly, assume for a moment that North Korea DID have ICBM's. I'd hardly want to invade such a nation with controversial forces. "Hey, let's invade RUSSIA with 400,000 men from the infantry. I'm sure they will want to play this game fair and square, even though they know they can't deal with us in field battle."

You'd get nuked.

You die.

You lose.

So does the whole fucking world, from the nuclear winter. Think twice before you want to start a war with a nuclear nation. In fact, think twice before you want to start a war at ALL!

So your fine with letting Kim have his way and the North Koreans starving eh?

If the price for stopping their starvation will come at the price of sacrificing 85% of the Earth's human population, including the "starving North Koreans", from massive radioactive fallout, then yes, I'm fine with it. Really.

Apparently they are. They hate Bush, I can tell from D3V's view of him causing the oil prices to go up. How the fuck does that have anything to do with Bush? It's called those gay ass Arabian oil monopolies that hate America and don't care if they lose money by not selling us oil cause they are already fucking rich as hell. And there are no statistics to prove that Clintion did anything for the economy, he was just around when it was good. 9/11 caused people to panic and pull out of the market, fucking learn your information.

It's people like you that were the reason Hitler killed millions of Jews, and Stalin killed millions of his own people.

True, Chruser you cannot just ignore suffering to save your own skin... Besides, 85% of the worlds population?! Come on Chruser, not anywhere near that many people would die...

Most likely more, if an all out nuclear war were to happen.

Other countries could say the same fucking thing about us. And what about China, why not them, then. You can not go and attack someone because they have technology, and you feel threatend. If they were to use it, which is very unlikely, then go ahead.

Many countries hate us. Hey, I have a great idea. Lets start World War III because our pride heavily outweighs our reason.

Um, have we attacked them, no, so drop it.

Yes, but the fact of the matter is that you are actually trying to justify the hypothetical situation of us attacking them.

We are not talking about an all-out nuclear war you dunce.