No. Korea: Man's Inhumanity to Man

[HagiaSophia]

Abraham Cooper reporting:

Since 2002, defectors among the flood of refugees from North Korea have detailed firsthand accounts of systematic starvation, torture and murder. Enemies of the state are used in experiments to develop new generations of chemical and biological weapons that threaten the world. A microcosm of these horrors is Camp 22, one of 12 concentration camps housing an estimated 200,000 political prisoners facing torture or execution for such “crimes” as being a Christian or a relative of someone suspected of deviation from “official ideology of the state.” Another eyewitness, Kwon Hyuk, formerly chief manager at Camp 22, repeated to me what he asserted to the BBC: “I witnessed a whole family being tested on suffocating gas and dying in the gas chamber. . . . The parents were vomiting and dying, but until the very last moment they tried to save kids by doing mouth-to-mouth breathing.”

washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2214-2005Mar25?language=printer

 

[Yaegel]

I believe it’s called "“Hell on Earth”.

 

[HagiaSophia]

Yaegel:

I believe it’s called "“Hell on Earth”.

Hard to believe that an innocent babe can grow into adulthood and perpetrate this kind of thing - it’s just almost “inhuman” - as if something “genetic” were missing.

 

[Norwich]

Seems to be as bad if not worse than Iraq. Now, if we follow the prescedent of Iraq and apply the same rules, i.e.

Capable of attacking the western world? Yes, we know they have nuclear weapons.
Declaring war on it’s own citizens? Yes, this article adequately bears out that truth.
Being a danger and dealing with terrorists? That seems a fairly well established fact.
Destabilising the entire area? Yes, N. Korea has been at odds with everyone there for a number of years.
Has a despotic dictator who threatens anyone in the country that potentially stands in his way? Yes, We all knowe how he behaves.

Why hasn’t America invaded yet? These were the arguments used for Iraq?

Welcome to the world where spurious arguments for a particular course of action return to bite you in the ****. Or is it just double standards?

 

[Matt25]

Norwich:

Seems to be as bad if not worse than Iraq. Now, if we follow the prescedent of Iraq and apply the same rules, i.e.

Capable of attacking the western world? Yes, we know they have nuclear weapons.
Declaring war on it’s own citizens? Yes, this article adequately bears out that truth.
Being a danger and dealing with terrorists? That seems a fairly well established fact.
Destabilising the entire area? Yes, N. Korea has been at odds with everyone there for a number of years.
Has a despotic dictator who threatens anyone in the country that potentially stands in his way? Yes, We all knowe how he behaves.

Why hasn’t America invaded yet? These were the arguments used for Iraq?

Welcome to the world where spurious arguments for a particular course of action return to bite you in the ****. Or is it just double standards?

The differences between Iraq and North Korea are that

a) NK has weapons of mass destruction and Iraq did not.

b) Iraq has the second biggest oil reserves in the world, NK is resource poor.

c) China is a darn sight closer to NK than it is to Iraq and they might not be keen on US troops on their border.

 

[Norwich]

Matt25:

The differences between Iraq and North Korea are that

a) NK has weapons of mass destruction and Iraq did not.

b) Iraq has the second biggest oil reserves in the world, NK is resource poor.

c) China is a darn sight closer to NK than it is to Iraq and they might not be keen on US troops on their border.

Gillam’s a bit quiet on this one Matt, any idea where she is?

 

[Richardols]

Matt25:

a) NK has weapons of mass destruction and Iraq did not.

But, when Bush invaded, he thought Iraq had them, so that’s not a reason not to invade.

b) Iraq has the second biggest oil reserves in the world, NK is resource poor.

I thought that the Bushies claim that we are spreading freedom. If so, it shouldn’t matter whether the oppressed people live in a rich or poor country.

c) China is a darn sight closer to NK than it is to Iraq and they might not be keen on US troops on their border.

Since when did the opinions of other countries matter to Bush?

I sense hypocrisy on the part of the Administration.