1 minute ago, Naam said:

agree with both points. unfortunately sanctions do not harm those in power but the already suffering population. and if anybody is naïve enough to believe sanctions might cause the population to overthrow a regime with an extremely powerful military then he/she has my sympathy and is entitled for the certificate "possesses a lot of no idea..."

 

sanctions could also be dangerous because they might pressure North Korea to sell nuclear technology. there's cash galore available from interested parties.

Even without sanctions, those is power have abused their civilians for years.  The powers to be in the UN know sanctions hit the people the most.  And not 100% sure their intent is to overthrow Kim.  Just stop him from the nuclear path he's taking.

 

It'd be hard for NK to sell technology if avenues for banking were eliminated.  And shipping.  Up to China and Russia to handle that one.

2 hours ago, Naam said:

please learned Sir,

tell us how to deal with "them" and explain what actions of North Korea justify retaliation.

there is only one way to deal with them, like it or not -   do whatever is necessary to delete the bloody dictator and murderer kim, even if collateral damage cannot be avoided

8 hours ago, inThailand said:

Trump inherited this mess from leaders from the USA and from the world, who failed to stop NK. And even now only Trump is making a stand and these others do nothing but criticise.

Trump is just the loud mouthpiece of US Deep state . They want war , war means profits and distracts from the US internal problems.

17 hours ago, IAMHERE said:

I just watched a Ted TAlk on youtube; malcolm gladwell norden bombsight. I am not so sure USA bombing is all that good, not the results anyway. They better get Kim with the first bomb or he'll be in China or Russia within hours and never be got.

 

If this could be resolved by Kim peacefully retiring to wherever, security and lavish lifestyle assured, I should think most involved sides would go for it. Better than most alternatives. Just not seeing him taking this path.

2 hours ago, sweatalot said:

there is only one way to deal with them, like it or not -   do whatever is necessary to delete the bloody dictator and murderer kim, even if collateral damage cannot be avoided

BRAVO! let's kill and maim innocent people as it was and is always done and then call it collateral damage.

 

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

it'd be hard for NK to sell technology if avenues for banking were eliminated.  And shipping. 

where there is a will there is a way. the druglords are moving billions of cash and five tiny USB-thumbdrives each 1tb can hold all the literature that was ever published on this planet.  

1 hour ago, Naam said:

BRAVO! let's kill and maim innocent people as it was and is always done and then call it collateral damage.

 

kill thousands of people to save millions  .... (dimensions up to you)

2 hours ago, Naam said:

BRAVO! let's kill and maim innocent people as it was and is always done and then call it collateral damage.

 

Yes, the 9/11 bombers have had the same idea and didn't worry about "collateral damage".

 

 @sweatalot's , think about the reaction in the US (and the world) to only (sorry)~ 3,000 people  and compare it the with possible collateral damage in NK alone.

 

Concerning your following comment

34 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

kill thousands of people to save millions  .... (dimensions up to you)

are you sure it would "save" the life of millions - and not destroy another "million" of innocent people?

 

Edited September 25, 20178 yr by puck2

1 hour ago, sweatalot said:

kill thousands of people to save millions  .... (dimensions up to you)

Sounds to me about as logical as cutting off the head to save the body...

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

Sounds to me about as logical as cutting off the head to save the body...

Are you North Korean citizen ?

6 minutes ago, tonray said:

Are you North Korean citizen ?

No.

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

No.

Is that the flag of the DPRK as your avatar ?  Why ?

10 minutes ago, baboon said:

No.

Why do you use the DPRK flag then ?

 

What do you think of the forced labor camps and the kidnapping of South Korean and Japanese citizens that NK has undertaken ? Since you are not North Korean, then you can answer with no fear, correct ?

Edited September 25, 20178 yr by tonray

2 minutes ago, tonray said:

Why do you use the DPRK flag then ?

Because a moderator removed the one I had of Bob Mugabe so I just stuck that one up instead. I really wouldn't read too much into it...

4 minutes ago, tonray said:

Why do you use the DPRK flag then ?

 

What do you think of the forced labor camps and the kidnapping of South Korean and Japanese citizens that NK has undertaken ? Since you are not North Korean, then I you can answer with no fear, correct ?

He's from the UK.  Yes, very strange to have a NK flag for an avatar.  And to aggressively support such a brutal government.

1 minute ago, baboon said:

Because a moderator removed the one I had of Bob Mugabe so I just stuck that one up instead. I really wouldn't read too much into it...

I guess that answers out questions, tonray.  Confused for sure.

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

He's from the UK.  Yes, very strange to have a NK flag for an avatar.  And to aggressively support such a brutal government.

I want him to answer my questions...then we'll see

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I guess that answers out questions, tonray.  Confused for sure.

Better that than advertising the fact I wear crappy trousers, if we are going down that path...

2 minutes ago, tonray said:

I want him to answer my questions...then we'll see

I am more than glad to do so.

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

I am more than glad to do so.

You have to ask permission from Kim before you can answer ? Is that the delay ?

3 minutes ago, tonray said:

You have to ask permission from Kim before you can answer ? Is that the delay ?

Yes, if you like.

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

Yes, if you like.

Ok...clearly you cannot speak out against NK in public. I feel sorry for you. But also see no reason to continue to see your posts since we know what and who you are now.

16 minutes ago, tonray said:

Ok...clearly you cannot speak out against NK in public. I feel sorry for you. But also see no reason to continue to see your posts since we know what and who you are now.

Do we? OK, right you are...

 

Edit: I did not see the second part of your post regarding the labour camps, etc. I am always happy to discuss anything DPRK. 

Edited September 25, 20178 yr by baboon