Obviously NK is the monkey f'n with the world (the cubs) ..
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Obviously NK is the monkey f'n with the world (the cubs) ..
My point is the following - more nuclear powers = the world is worse off. It doesn't matter who has the right to judge or not. Having more nations with nukes blows. Therefore, if it's NK, Zimbawe or Mexifornia, who gets them, it makes the world suck more. I want the world to suck less.IRONCHEF wrote:
Ok, let's get something straight. I'm not justifying what kim jong is doing to his people. I'm saying I don't know what he's done, though I'm sure it's at least as bad as what saddam has done. So great, he's an evil friggne dictator. My question is "WHO" has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?
If we were friendly with NK, would we care? damn straight we WOULDN"T care..just like india and pakistan. but because we're hypocritical in our policies, we do care. My challenge is with how we pick and choose when the answer is to be friendly. Is there not a popular quote saying you catch more flies with honey? Is this little power hungry madman not easily dissuaded with riches, power, and responsibility? We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form. Same shit with Iran when we would not debate their president..out of principle.
WEVE BEEN TRYING TO FUCKING TALK TO THAT UFCKING DICTATOR FOR YEARS AND GUESS WHAT, HE WONT LISTEN. HE WONT EVEN LISTEN TO THEIR CLOSEST ALLY, CHINA. We damn well DID care when india and pakistan got nukes, but the fact that they arent planning to use them makes it less disturbing.IRONCHEF wrote:
Ok, let's get something straight. I'm not justifying what kim jong is doing to his people. I'm saying I don't know what he's done, though I'm sure it's at least as bad as what saddam has done. So great, he's an evil friggne dictator. My question is "WHO" has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?
If we were friendly with NK, would we care? damn straight we WOULDN"T care..just like india and pakistan. but because we're hypocritical in our policies, we do care. My challenge is with how we pick and choose when the answer is to be friendly. Is there not a popular quote saying you catch more flies with honey? Is this little power hungry madman not easily dissuaded with riches, power, and responsibility? We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form. Same shit with Iran when we would not debate their president..out of principle.
Wow those lineage players must know more than everyone else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_righ … rth_Korea.
I know it is Wikipedia, but it gives you a starting point that you can then look at and actually look at the sources of the article.
Braaaavo on the research bud, really keep talking out of your butt it just keeps strengthening your case.
Edit : Damn link won't go all the way to the article. But it will allow you to do a search which will take you to the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_righ … rth_Korea.
I know it is Wikipedia, but it gives you a starting point that you can then look at and actually look at the sources of the article.
Braaaavo on the research bud, really keep talking out of your butt it just keeps strengthening your case.
Edit : Damn link won't go all the way to the article. But it will allow you to do a search which will take you to the article.
Last edited by Deuceman (2006-10-11 13:04:19)
....IRONCHEF wrote:
Ok, let's get something straight. I'm not justifying what kim jong is doing to his people. I'm saying I don't know what he's done, though I'm sure it's at least as bad as what saddam has done. So great, he's an evil friggne dictator. My question is "WHO" has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?
If we were friendly with NK, would we care? damn straight we WOULDN"T care..just like india and pakistan. but because we're hypocritical in our policies, we do care. My challenge is with how we pick and choose when the answer is to be friendly. Is there not a popular quote saying you catch more flies with honey? Is this little power hungry madman not easily dissuaded with riches, power, and responsibility? We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form. Same shit with Iran when we would not debate their president..out of principle.
And to no surprise we are back to square one. All of your questions have already been answered, yet you continue to drag this on as if they weren't. This is supposed to be a debate, yet you come in here actively proclaiming your own ignorance and expect us to educate you.
The world has that right to say who, and they currently are. This has already been addressed several times in this thread, where you revealed your ignorance to North Korea's history of missile sales to terrorist nations.IRONCHEF wrote:
Who has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?
Once again, this has been covered many, many times. It is North Korea who has refused to participate in 6-party talks. This is a conflict that not only concerns the U.S., but the the entire world as well...especially countries in East Asia. When this region is on the brink of a possible nuclear arms race, bilateral talks involving only the U.S. and North Korea are not only a lost cause, but inappropriate. Don't, for a second, think you have any clue about U.S. diplomacy, because with every post you make, you reveal more and more apsects of your own ignorance.IRONCHEF wrote:
We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form.
Last edited by Fancy_Pollux (2006-10-11 13:05:50)
Wow, so many angry and expressive people. You all think i love kim jong il, and you think I think he's a pussycat, because i tried to explain that I've not seen evidence of him being a madman, siting actual non-us-media sources for my beliefs.
deuce, not sure if you know it, but south korean kids know more about their conflicts with kim jong il than you do, even as resourceful as you are. also, they have a reason to know that supercedes yours. oh yeah, have you met the people that populated the wikipedia sources you're quoting?
deuce, not sure if you know it, but south korean kids know more about their conflicts with kim jong il than you do, even as resourceful as you are. also, they have a reason to know that supercedes yours. oh yeah, have you met the people that populated the wikipedia sources you're quoting?
And once again, you are lying like youre life depends on it. I have not been showed by you any specific points I've made to be in error. Why do you keep stalking and harrassing me then? I have no idea. It is long past being old.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
....IRONCHEF wrote:
Ok, let's get something straight. I'm not justifying what kim jong is doing to his people. I'm saying I don't know what he's done, though I'm sure it's at least as bad as what saddam has done. So great, he's an evil friggne dictator. My question is "WHO" has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?
If we were friendly with NK, would we care? damn straight we WOULDN"T care..just like india and pakistan. but because we're hypocritical in our policies, we do care. My challenge is with how we pick and choose when the answer is to be friendly. Is there not a popular quote saying you catch more flies with honey? Is this little power hungry madman not easily dissuaded with riches, power, and responsibility? We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form. Same shit with Iran when we would not debate their president..out of principle.
And to no surprise we are back to square one. All of your questions have already been answered, yet you continue to drag this on as if they weren't. This is supposed to be a debate, yet you come in here actively proclaiming your own ignorance and expect us to educate you.The world has that right to say who, and they currently are. This has already been addressed several times in this thread, where you revealed your ignorance to North Korea's history of missile sales to terrorist nations.IRONCHEF wrote:
Who has the right to say who can and can't have nukes?Once again, this has been covered many, many times. It is North Korea who has refused to participate in 6-party talks. This is a conflict that not only concerns the U.S., but the the entire world as well...especially countries in East Asia. When this region is on the brink of a possible nuclear arms race, bilateral talks involving only the U.S. and North Korea are not only a lost cause, but inappropriate. Don't, for a second, think you have any clue about U.S. diplomacy, because with every post you make, you reveal more and more apsects of your own ignorance.IRONCHEF wrote:
We'll never know because we're too scared of his bluff and we have no leaders with the capacity to evolve civilization with diplomacy. Refusing not to talk to NK is not "taking time to let dipolmacy" take form.
But i will compliment you on at least saing something in this post, even though it's mostly insulting me.
IRONCHEF wrote:
And once again, you are lying like youre life depends on it. I have not been showed by you any specific points I've made to be in error. Why do you keep stalking and harrassing me then? I have no idea. It is long past being old.
But i will compliment you on at least saing something in this post, even though it's mostly insulting me.
Your antics are becoming tiresome.IRONCHEF wrote:
I'm sorry, I didn't read any articles lately saying that North Korea actually sold weapons or technology to anyone. Did you read that or something? or do you also not know what you're talking about?
Last edited by Fancy_Pollux (2006-10-11 13:41:43)
You're doing nothing but proving me right. You have only proven to be a liar, a coward, and full of shit having denied me many times in my request to privately or publicly show me why i'm so ignorant, why I'm so uneducated, why my opinion is so wrong.
You mentioned that my credibility is on the line and that I have none. Despite the karma i've recieved and the corresponding posts next to mine to the contrary, you are unable to show me how I'm non-credible in my opinions. Please PM me and do so.
You mentioned that my credibility is on the line and that I have none. Despite the karma i've recieved and the corresponding posts next to mine to the contrary, you are unable to show me how I'm non-credible in my opinions. Please PM me and do so.
How exactly am I proving you right? You're asking me to point out where you are wrong, and I am! Are you really that delusional? When 99% of the replies to this thread are mocking your joke of an opinion, do you somehow read those as compliments? Just read the replies to this thread. At every point you attempt to make, there is a counterpoint which undeniably shows your ignorance. It can't get much simpler than that.IRONCHEF wrote:
You're doing nothing but proving me right. You have only proven to be a liar, a coward, and full of shit having denied me many times in my request to privately or publicly show me why i'm so ignorant, why I'm so uneducated, why my opinion is so wrong.
Last edited by Fancy_Pollux (2006-10-11 13:21:04)
Well since you are too smart to actually go look at the sources I will post them for you brilliant buddy of ours.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-prk/reports-Amnesty International reports about North Korea
http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/156/
http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=nkorea
http://news.scotsman.com/international. … 2285122005
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/ … 311990.htm
http://www.nknet.org/
Wow that took me all of 5 minutes to look at the sources which were provided at the end of the article. Especially like the ones written by shock a South Korean. Your source of info is kids playing video games. My sources are newspapers and human right watch groups. Hmmm who has the better sources dumbass.
Again Braaaavo for proving our points.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-prk/reports-Amnesty International reports about North Korea
http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/156/
http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=nkorea
http://news.scotsman.com/international. … 2285122005
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/ … 311990.htm
http://www.nknet.org/
Wow that took me all of 5 minutes to look at the sources which were provided at the end of the article. Especially like the ones written by shock a South Korean. Your source of info is kids playing video games. My sources are newspapers and human right watch groups. Hmmm who has the better sources dumbass.
Again Braaaavo for proving our points.
Another topic reduced to simplistic bickering and going down the toilet.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
It's not simplistic. A moron made a comment. He is too stubborn to even look at articles that refute everything he has said. Not our problem his brain has been fried by gaming. I really wonder if the Korea Times has the right to speak about the problems with North Korea that they have seen. I mean they might not be Lineage players.
I meant that you denying me the evidence of my inaccuracies by using cheapshots and insults was proving my point that you are a total coward, liar, and forum troll with NOTHING constructive to say. I've proven this aspect of your posting history at least 3 times this week and also in PMs where you totally showed your cowardice.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
How exactly am I proving you right? You're asking me to point out where you are wrong, and I am! Are you really that delusional? When 99% of the replies to this thread are mocking your joke of an opinion, do you somehow read those as compliments? Just read the replies to this thread. At every point you attempt to make, there is a counterpoint which undeniably shows your ignorance. It can't get much simpler than that.IRONCHEF wrote:
You're doing nothing but proving me right. You have only proven to be a liar, a coward, and full of shit having denied me many times in my request to privately or publicly show me why i'm so ignorant, why I'm so uneducated, why my opinion is so wrong.
My only problem on this board is arguing with you. You're obviously ONLY here to get a rise out of people you pick and choose to harrass. You've long since pissed me off intellectually as you've got no measure of intellect left..just childish antics and insult.
I'll try again to ignore you as I've just reported you hoping it will do something to end your stalking and trashing of my posts.
Name calling is simplistic, that is what I was reffering to.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Oh and I love the beginning post. Hypocracy? Is that how it is spelled in England? Just wondering.
Agreed. Also, it is not our responsibility to educate those ignorant to the topic we are debating. Such people should not be participating in the first place. It derails the conversation and ultimately ruins the thread, especially when people, such as IRONCHEF, ignore the facts and sources when they are directly presented to them. The majority of threads in which IRONCHEF decides to voice his "opinion" and begs for us to educate him end up like this.Deuceman wrote:
It's not simplistic. A moron made a comment. He is too stubborn to even look at articles that refute everything he has said. Not our problem his brain has been fried by gaming. I really wonder if the Korea Times has the right to speak about the problems with North Korea that they have seen. I mean they might not be Lineage players.
Thanks for the insults. They've been reported.Deuceman wrote:
It's not simplistic. A moron made a comment. He is too stubborn to even look at articles that refute everything he has said. Not our problem his brain has been fried by gaming. I really wonder if the Korea Times has the right to speak about the problems with North Korea that they have seen. I mean they might not be Lineage players.
And no, i've not had the chance to look at articles. I'm sure there's millions of articles from credible sources all over the globe that all say Kim Jong Il is a madman. I concede that. But it does nothing to change the valid argument I made that "i used non-us media sources" in discovering my "opinion" that "i don't know if Kim Jong Il is actually a madman because I've not met him." Can you handle that? or have you gone sooo overboard in your anger to just pick what you'd like to argue at the expense of nto even following the topic or its context?
nevermind..i'll just let you be. you won champ! good debate and serious talk!
Here is the prob I see with saying it is hypocritical. The UN is saying they shouldn't have it. Now if it was just the US fine you have a point. But it's the UN. And to say they have the right? So if you knew that your neighbor was a child molester you would have no problem with him working around children?
Yep. I provide factual proof for something IRONCHEF requests (but blatantly ignores), then I get called a "coward". What the hell does that mean?Kmarion wrote:
Name calling is simplistic, that is what I was reffering to.
But it does nothing to change the valid argument I made that "i used non-us media sources" in discovering my "opinion" that "i don't know if Kim Jong Il is actually a madman because I've not met him."
That is your argument? Please don't tell me you are serious about that. Uh the sources posted weren't all US media sources. Yeah we know who your non US sources are children. Mine are from South Korean newsman.
That is your argument? Please don't tell me you are serious about that. Uh the sources posted weren't all US media sources. Yeah we know who your non US sources are children. Mine are from South Korean newsman.
No, you quote irrelevant things I've said as my own proof. or you'll use some weakass one liner insult. you know damn well what specifics I was asking for and you purposefully ignored it. and here you are trying to cover it up with more insults to people who have nothing to do with you avoiding truth and credibility as I've called you a coward and a liar.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Yep. I provide factual proof for something IRONCHEF requests (but blatantly ignores), then I get called a "coward". What the hell does that mean?Kmarion wrote:
Name calling is simplistic, that is what I was reffering to.
do you behave like this to peoples' faces? do you get beaten down alot?
IRONCHEF did the same thing when I told him that North Korea has a history of selling missiles to terrorist nations. His logic simply was "well, I haven't read about this yet, so it can't be true!"Deuceman wrote:
But it does nothing to change the valid argument I made that "i used non-us media sources" in discovering my "opinion" that "i don't know if Kim Jong Il is actually a madman because I've not met him."
That is your argument? Please don't tell me you are serious about that. Uh the sources posted weren't all US media sources. Yeah we know who your non US sources are children. Mine are from South Korean newsman.
Proof:
IRONCHEF wrote:
I'm sorry, I didn't read any articles lately saying that North Korea actually sold weapons or technology to anyone. Did you read that or something? or do you also not know what you're talking about?
Last edited by Fancy_Pollux (2006-10-11 13:35:31)
Holy cow. can you read? Who gives a shit about the articles, the sources, or whatever you're arguing. I'm not debating your articles sources, I'm sure they're accurate. My "argument" is that it is irrelevent to "my opinion that i learned from actual koreans!" It's "my OPINION." It is not a crime to not have read wikipedia today or have quickly scoured the internet for supporting YOUR argument.Deuceman wrote:
But it does nothing to change the valid argument I made that "i used non-us media sources" in discovering my "opinion" that "i don't know if Kim Jong Il is actually a madman because I've not met him."
That is your argument? Please don't tell me you are serious about that. Uh the sources posted weren't all US media sources. Yeah we know who your non US sources are children. Mine are from South Korean newsman.
People usually provide some sort of proof or reference when participating in a debate.IRONCHEF wrote:
Holy cow. can you read? Who gives a shit about the articles, the sources, or whatever you're arguing.