N korea they have nukes aparently

[Raisedbyflames]

well looks like thier will be war, aparently they have tested a nuke and america carnt be a big bully to them anymore.

at least china has some common sence
if we are going to war prepare for some heavy propaganda on the news chanels they must think we are stupid the amount of propaganda and controlled news they chuck at us.
yeah and i look forward too seeing mushroom clouds

[mjmaskrey]

If they ever fire one in anger...I put £5 down that it'll be aimed at Matt Parker and Trey Stones House!

:)

[phatmuther]

ill be p.... off if the uk even think about getting involved in another freaking war, a nuclear one at that, just let america and korea blow each other up, leave us out of it.

that said, i cant see a nuclear war happening anytime soon.

[WACCOE]

If there's a nuclear war we all may aswell go riot.


And loot some shizzle.

[Raisedbyflames]

cool ill need some men with bad hair to join my mad max style biker gang im setting upready for the end of the world

[phatmuther]

cool ill need some men with bad hair to join my mad max style biker gang im setting upready for the end of the world

well you've got someone called max ;)

[Raisedbyflames]

we can goo round the country liberating women and raiding all off licences

[phatmuther]

are we gonna start now, or we gonna wait for the first nuke?

[Raisedbyflames]

we can wait for thefirst nuke we need to get our numbers up

[Kalou]

Lets see if UK/USA have the balls to attack a proper country instead of some third world one, they won't do anything because NKorea have everything to destroy both countries and it will be another decade before we are even out of Iraq, although I still don't know why they went in the first place.

[damien©]

Their won't be a War with North Korea, the only thing that will happen is China and N Korea will bargain for the US to leave the Area and the North Koreans will freeze all their Nuclear Ambitions.

You won't be able to Invade N Korea as they aren't liked, even slightly. If in the Unlikely event that they prepare to invade N Korea, they will have to have a huge offensive and blow up there Nuclear facilities before they could attack either Japan or South Korea. Which would be a hard task to do.

So I suspect the first option is the most likely. Sanctions wouldn't work, what could you sanction? Oh well maybe we will get to Kill ourselves pointlessly some other time.

[HotFish]

Lets see if UK/USA have the balls to attack a proper country instead of some third world one, they won't do anything because NKorea have everything to destroy both countries and it will be another decade before we are even out of Iraq, although I still don't know why they went in the first place.

See you are wrong..Iraq is one of the richest counties (in a sence) in the world! Why? Oil...just because what you see on the TV that the country and it's people look poor is right and wrong. They are poor only because of their previous dictator Sadam Hussian...he took all the money the people could have earned, their rights, lands etc and used it on himself and his people to build wmd's and nobody is sure why he wanted these though we can assume. His soild gold palaces surely didnt come for free.

Now in N.Korea we are seeing someone very similar, but for one N.Korea doesnt (to my knowledge) have anything the major powers of the world want (ie Oil). So he is just plain stupid if he thinks he can start to attack Japan, USA, Russia, UK etc and to be honest i hope he isnt that stupid.

cya

[Kalou]

Exactly, the Iraqi people had nothing but wooden houses, NKorea is a proper country so they will be the harder "enemy". If Iraq had so much WMD's where are they all? have we even found a scraping of a chemical?

Anyway war and politics at that is just a farce as far as I am concerned, I will continue paying tax so Tony Blair can hire a Bentley limo for a 2 minute journey, I ain't bothered.

[Dcontrol]

Some interesting things about North Korea courtesy of www.wikipedia.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korea#Missiles.2C_nuclear_weapons_program.2C _and_the_six-party_talks

[Raisedbyflames]

north korean army numbers at 1million everyone trains in the army at somepoints its part of their education.

[HotFish]

Exactly, the Iraqi people had nothing but wooden houses, NKorea is a proper country so they will be the harder "enemy". If Iraq had so much WMD's where are they all? have we even found a scraping of a chemical?

Anyway war and politics at that is just a farce as far as I am concerned, I will continue paying tax so Tony Blair can hire a Bentley limo for a 2 minute journey, I ain't bothered.

They are all proper countries arent they? Are you confusing North Korea with the south? Yes the south is rich much like Japan, with it brands such as Samsung etc. North Korea is much like Vietnam and similar counties, not in poverty, but not far from it.

I agree with taxes though, but it doesnt bother me as whoever is in charge we are going to be stung

cya

[Raisedbyflames]

theirs otherways wecan hurt them juststop food aid and they are screwed

[Raide]

Think about it, if someone drops a nuke then no amount of hard-assed army, or sturdy buildings, or great training will stop them all taking a swift kicking. If a war was to kick off then I think the Mad-Max style fun would be the least of our problems.

I think the US government is now annoyed because someone is starting to collect more nukes than they have and they want all the nukes in their playpen.

[Swifty]

Its simply a sign of power. For one it looks like if anything it wasnt a full warhead, or maybe not even a warhead at all that they detonated in the mine shaft.

As for nuclear war it won't happen for a while, yes America is of with Korea, but both leaders inlcuding the shrimpy Korean guy and quite frankly to scared of the consequences that could come from touching that big red button that says nuclear war.

Korea has done this to simply put its name on the map if you will, they did it so if the world ever does get into a war Korea will want people to realise that if you bomb them they got the stuff to bomb you.

In really simple terms its like a brand war on the high street... like Burton boys are considered weak and pointless ... they are the country without nukes :p then you got the people wearing thousand dollar suits and ties with top hats showing that they have money ... they are the guys with nukes.

Its just a bid to look powerful, Bush is p!ssed off but hes stupid and so has no idea what to do, he realises that if he attacks Korea he runs the risk of them retaliating with (if they have any) nukes, but if he leaves them alone it will look likes hes giving Korea the chance to build up there nuclear stockpile.

His next decision could be the most important of his presidential career to be frank...

hope he chooses carefully ...

[damien©]

I don't think this decision is one to be made by the US frankly, European and I assume South Korea and Japan will have a big influence in this decision along with the Friendly Nieghbours to the North China, Which is a Permanant Member of the Security Council.

[backin-strachan]

I can see China vs Korea unfortunately.

[derekm91]

well the U.S. already said months ago, that if N.K. launches any missiles they will be shot down with out any hesitation.

[damien©]

well the U.S. already said months ago, that if N.K. launches any missiles they will be shot down with out any hesitation.


Well they must off missed this one then....:D

[linkofhyrule]

I got to talking to my army m8 about this, and he is thinking that

A) NK doesn't have the planes or missiles to hit anywhere relatively far away from them.
B) They won't attack China because 'if it wasn't for China they'd be flat on their arses right now'
C) They're probably going to attack South Korea or Japan, nothing in Europe or anywhere near the US.
D) If the US wants to they can attack NK even with us already being in Iraq because.. we did it in 1942 with Germany and Japan.. so we should be able to in 2006 with Iraq and Korea.. :s

So that's from the mind of a soldier... :p

Anyway I agree that they can't attack the US, but I have a feeling that for some reason that some of your countries over there in Europe (France, UK), will probably join in if Korea attacks any one.

But really it would be mighty foolish for them to try and attack any one, they wouldn't have any one on their side..

And that was my 50 cents.

[tom91]

does anyone know if china and russia are allies with UK/USA? Because that would help alot lol.

[Raisedbyflames]

both china and russia have are part of the united nations tom

[damien©]

does anyone know if china and russia are allies with UK/USA? Because that would help alot lol.

China and North Korea are "friends" but even they were disappointed that the test took place.

China and Russia don't normally agree with UK/US on most things, you could blame this on their Trade links but you could ague the same thing with Israel and the US.

[Blaze Lord]

Noone wants NK with nukes. There's a reason why Korea is the last hold out for landmine use. Because NK is frakkin' crazy. But I also doubt that the North Koreans are actually going to use their nukes.

What's for more frightening is North Korea not using their new weapons.

..And selling them instead.

[BiRO]

At least theres no crazy north korean guys with nukes strapped to there backs running into maccy d's because its american. When the iranians start with the nukes is when were all screwed

[KatzMotel]

yeah and i look forward too seeing mushroom clouds
I know! Nothing turns me on more than the mass-killing of innocent lives!

I can see China vs Korea unfortunately.
China vs... which half of Korea? Sorry if I've missed the point, but I only skimmed the posts in this thread. At any rate, I don't think the PRC would be willing to commit to any large wars at present- not if it would potentially mean jeopardising the economic growth it has been experiencing- the same growth which will arguably make it the world's leading superpower in years to come.

But at any rate, regarding the DPRK... I'll just say what I've said to practically everybody else over this matter for years. There won't be a war between North Korea and the United States (along with it's lapdogs) for a number of reasons.

First of all, let's look at the incentives for the US not to engage in a war with the DPRK. The most obvious is, of course, North Korea could be harbouring a nuclear arsenal. It does not necessarily have to be ICBMs, but perhaps smaller ballistic missiles and reverse-engineered Russian weapon designs. If the US suspects that the DPRK legitimately has weapons of mass destruction (as opposed to Iraq's phantom WMDs), I doubt it would risk committing itself to such a potentially... explosive war.

Secondly, even the conventional forces fielded by the North Koreans are potentially rather potent. Admittedly, in terms of equipment, there are heavily outmatched by the US forces, but the number of troops that the DPRK could press into service is large, and given the political and social climate of the DPRK, could potentially be fanatical.

Admittedly, I doubt that large numbers and an element of fanaticism could save the North Korean armed forces in a direct confrontation against US forced, but one must also remember that North Korea is a rather mountainous country- this terrain would most certainly be used to the North Koreans' advantage, and could cause significant problems for the US forces.

I also doubt that the North Koreans would legitimately want to commit themselves to a war with the United States. Keeping in mind what the US has done to Iraq, there's little doubt that this war would bring complete ruin to the already extremely fragile economic infrastructure of North Korea, and lay waste to the major cities.

But moving on, applying UN sanctions is actually quite laughable in this situation. Not only does the North Korean political and economic system, 'Juche', stress self-reliance, but any sanctions will only result in more suffering for the ordinary people in North Korea. What's more, since a large number of North Korea's trade comes from the production of counterfeit goods, drugs and weapons, it is unlikely that trade sanctions would really be that effective.

And, since I've failed to mention it earlier on, starting a war with the DPRK would essentially open up a new front for the already strained US forces. Of course, this isn't even bringing into consideration the United States'... concern over Iran.

[EDIT]Okay, that was longer than expected. Excuse any errors- I'm quite tired to have realised.

[TBS Trojan]

china, the biggest army in the world+little NK=PWNAGE
gd do i hate NK. flexing their muscles when their pretty much alone vs the world.i agree with the comment about Trey Parker he'll definitly get killed. ha

[Chuck]

nuke em:cool:

[TBS Trojan]

i like the way you think.

[Jenova]

Its COLD WAR 2!!!

end result...nothing happens....

Wow a nuclear weapon big whoop come on its just so America lower there abuse of power.

If we get involved in a war i dont think anyone could fight it due to its only a button away for N Korea to end it.

Who the hells going to blow up England when its the whole kingdom thatl be effected.

Its over hyped crap, a weapon wooo its nothing but phycological warfare. I mean I got a nuclear weapon to...IN MY PANTS:)

Chill out, relax and turn on the 360 and if were going to die best do it on Oblivion(Y)

[Kalou]

Its COLD WAR 2!!!I mean I got a nuclear weapon to...IN MY PANTS:)

What would a cheesy nob do against a nuclear missile?

[Jenova]

What would a cheesy nob do against a nuclear missile?

My chick asked that and she found out:)

I swear everytime i "release the beast" its like rewatching the film Anaconda

Oh no theres a nuclear bomb, i gaurantee it wont hit us...

I half gaurantee it wont go off...(:/) :geek: :'( :|

PS: I wash my anaconda i dont have helmet cheddar(Y)

[Kalou]

My chick asked that and she found out:)
PS: I wash my anaconda i dont have helmet cheddar(Y)

You can't beat cheddar, plus it's something for her to eat while doing her daily routine.

Anyway I'm off to bed now :D

[Jenova]

Look if she wanted Cheddar shed ask.

But she likes her Python clean(Y)

Plus i....

Damn mods looking at this you PERVERTS!!!

Kids under 15 years of age please look away

My genetaily is enormous however its clean.

Damn N Korea getting the nuke, its ok in away (phew on topic)

[dikiminster]

All this shizzle reminds me of....http://romzebest.free.fr/public/kiss-me_team-america.gif

:)

[KatzMotel]

nuke em:cool:
Oh god, why did I even bother writing all I did? :(

[damien©]

Oh god, why did I even bother writing all I did? :(

You felt compelled to share your views, but you can't cure stupid! :p

[Blaze Lord]

I enjoyed your post Katz, don't give up.

[bhafc87]

The world should keep its nose out of Foreign business unless it affects someone inparticular.

I know what your gonna say "what, like , when they press the button and fire it on someone?"

No, I mean if they start threatening countries. But the bottom line is this, the leader of NK is not an idiot, he might be a little jumped up dictator type but he is not stupid. He knows if he presses that button, the world is going to send all of its nukes to NK. Bye bye NK. The NK nukes wont even reach foreign soil before other countries realise what has happened and return fire.

He is doing it as someone else said, to flex their military muscle and if Bush wants to go round starting a war over it then let him do it by himself. I am all for sending our UK troops out to war zones that need us there along with our allies the USA but not when there is no need to.

Wars in Afghan, Iraq, Bush threatens Iran, syria and now NK....what the f*** !! Who next..China ? I really hope not, can you imagine that..if that happend..we might as well start that bike gang now, sod everything else.

But the USA has got to shut its trap on this one, I dont see why anyone is getting this much involved, its pointless.

In fact the USA has got to get rid of Bush, I have never known a Leader so thick and stupid....well, Blair comes a close second.

"Who called me stupid?"

"errr Mr President, it was some guy in the UK"

"What!!! the UK has violated the rights of every American Citizen!! this Axis of evil must be destroyed!..nuke em Sam!"

[derekm91]

The world should keep its nose out of Foreign business unless it affects someone inparticular.

I know what your gonna say "what, like , when they press the button and fire it on someone?"

No, I mean if they start threatening countries. But the bottom line is this, the leader of NK is not an idiot, he might be a little jumped up dictator type but he is not stupid. He knows if he presses that button, the world is going to send all of its nukes to NK. Bye bye NK. The NK nukes wont even reach foreign soil before other countries realise what has happened and return fire.

He is doing it as someone else said, to flex their military muscle and if Bush wants to go round starting a war over it then let him do it by himself. I am all for sending our UK troops out to war zones that need us there along with our allies the USA but not when there is no need to.

Wars in Afghan, Iraq, Bush threatens Iran, syria and now NK....what the f*** !! Who next..China ? I really hope not, can you imagine that..if that happend..we might as well start that bike gang now, sod everything else.

But the USA has got to shut its trap on this one, I dont see why anyone is getting this much involved, its pointless.

In fact the USA has got to get rid of Bush, I have never known a Leader so thick and stupid....well, Blair comes a close second.

"Who called me stupid?"

"errr Mr President, it was some guy in the UK"

"What!!! the UK has violated the rights of every American Citizen!! this Axis of evil must be destroyed!..nuke em Sam!"

not if the results could effect the world's well being.

[Killer 57]

"..some guy in the UK"

Now thats what I call precise Intel!

Yeah get rid of Bush, thats pretty much a given, but I wouldn't call him stupid, He still hasn't reached JC level yet (Who claimed that a Rabbit attacked him while fishing in a lake, riiiiiiiight).

I don't know much about politics and I'm not going to pretend like I do. So I can't say I agree with Katz, Since I don't know enough about politics to form analysis of the situation. I do hope its true, however, because I don't want another war, much less one that involves nuclear weapons.

[Blaze Lord]

not if the results could effect the world's well being.

You mean like electing the wrong man for the job of most powerful man in the world not once, but twice? Because that affected the world's well being.

[damien©]

You mean like electing the wrong man for the job of most powerful man in the world not once, but twice? Because that affected the world's well being.

That's the Problem with America and people's perception of it. Granted based on Power and Military, the US Presidency is the most powerful Job you can get.

But the World is not based on the Power of One Man and I think that's where America and Some European Countries (including the UK) by Supporting the US justified there "policing" efforts where really it should of been discussed properly and come up with a global stance with the Top Countries of the Major Regions + the G8.

I don't blame North Korea for what they are doing, I blame China for a lack of Influence and the US Military for once again remaining on the doorstep of North Korea.

It's not as if things went balls up it would take long to get there.

[Blaze Lord]

No, the world isn't based on just that one presidency, but it clearly is the singular position with the most power (and at one time it hands down had the most influence). I don't think it's a "problem" to keep that realistic fact in mind.

And there's a reason we have a military presence there: South Korea. To be quite honest, our hundreds of thousands of landmines and our troops on the ground are pretty much the only reasons why a quarter of a million North Korean soldiers aren't crossing the border.

[damien©]

To be quite honest, our hundreds of thousands of landmines and our troops on the ground are pretty much the only reasons why a quarter of a million North Korean soldiers aren't crossing the border.

I don't really think that's the Case, the US has a fairly strong force in the Pacific Ocean without there forces at South Korea.

I don't think they are necessary, they could easily protect South Korea from a more distant "stronghold".

North Korea is like Iraq in Asia, it has to appear strong but really it's a very weak country that to be honest needs help, the country is starving and that's much to the fault of it's own leader.

[Blaze Lord]

It's starving because of how much of its resources goes into its military. Nearly 50% of its citizens are active soldiers. It's something like the 5th or 6th largest military in the world. Iraq it is not.

[damien©]

It's starving because of how much of its resources goes into its military. Nearly 50% of its citizens are active soldiers. It's something like the 5th or 6th largest military in the world. Iraq it is not.

I was merely referring to it's political motivations obviously the proportions are different but North Korea in there minds has to be seen as a competitive force to deal with as it's very much an isolated country. Which is a shame.

That's why in which it has to appear stronger than it actually is, I doubt they even have the capability of firing successful Nuclear Warheads, it has had so many failures. It would suit the US and Most of Europe, South Korea and Japan for them to be seen as a Danger. But as yet I don't think they are.

Sanctions won't work, you'll need to give North Korea the huge incentive it needs to join the Global Community like very much China has. And China has prospered very well over the last several years that's the kind of incentive I think North Korea could with.

Also the differences between the North and South have to be settled aswell, the country was torn apart and now each side has very bad views of each other which isn't good if you expect people to live side by side.

[Blaze Lord]

Come on, man.. Clinging to the hope that a nation that can successfully maintain a heavy water reactor and successfully test a nuke, even if its just a bomb, won't eventually be able to develop ICBMs (if they haven't already) is just myopic.

[damien©]

Well only 3 nations have successfully Constructed and Maintained ICBMs, China, Russia and the US. I can't see how North Korea would be next on the list personally.

Personally this type of technology should be outlawed and permantly restricted whioch it's meant to be under the Non-Proliferation Treaty but if these "Top 5" countries inforced this properly then we wouldn't have the situation we have now.

With Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea developing Nuclear Weapons, all very unstable countries but without the support of the Top 5 wouldn't of been able to do this. It might be worth mentioning it was the US that helped Iran develop there Nuclear capabilities prior to the Overthrow of Government.

We really only have ourselves to blame.

[bhafc87]

not if the results could effect the world's well being.

What! Its not going to happen ! NK is not going to Nuke anyone, if they do, they will be wiped off the face of the planet, but just because they MIGHT do something just not justify America sticking its nose in.

How would you like it if you said to a mate,

"blimey look how nice that car is, but its so expensive, If I did not care about my own freedom I would pick up that rock break the window and nick it,,hahahahahaha !!"

Next thing you know, PC plod has overheard this and instead of having a polite word in your ear he sends 3 wagons load of riot police to your front door plus and air support unit and a dog unit and nicked you and seized everything in your house because you MAY have nicked that car...not fair is it really...it was only a macho comment.

I know its not totally the same thing, but the principal is still there, you cant just go to war with whoever gets on your nerves that particular weak.

War should always be about last resorts and having no other options.

Bush is his countrys own worst enemy. If he went perhaps that could save the world

[TBS Trojan]

jesus c, i dont see what the hell people dont like bush for, the war? nukes arent the only reason we went in, now they sorta have a democracy. Casualties? dont join the gd armed forces if u arent willing to die for your country, and when the number of deaths in iraq get higher than D-Day(which is 29,000), then people can say get out of iraq.

[Blaze Lord]

jesus c, i dont see what the hell people dont like bush for, the war?
You don't vote, do you?

[TBS Trojan]

i would if i could, y dont u.

[Blaze Lord]

I do, but I also try to keep myself informed instead of indoctrinated.

[Killer 57]

What! Its not going to happen ! NK is not going to Nuke anyone, if they do, they will be wiped off the face of the planet, but just because they MIGHT do something just not justify America sticking its nose in.

How would you like it if you said to a mate,

"blimey look how nice that car is, but its so expensive, If I did not care about my own freedom I would pick up that rock break the window and nick it,,hahahahahaha !!"

Next thing you know, PC plod has overheard this and instead of having a polite word in your ear he sends 3 wagons load of riot police to your front door plus and air support unit and a dog unit and nicked you and seized everything in your house because you MAY have nicked that car...not fair is it really...it was only a macho comment.

I know its not totally the same thing, but the principal is still there, you cant just go to war with whoever gets on your nerves that particular weak.

War should always be about last resorts and having no other options.

Bush is his countrys own worst enemy. If he went perhaps that could save the world

Yeah but we are talking about the Possibility of thousands of innocent people dying, not some car being nicked.

[bhafc87]

Fair point killer, but there is still nothing to say NK is going to use them and the US should just keep tabs on NK and attack only if totally needed.

NK wont use them, its ridiculous to suggest they will. In which case is the US not really just starting another sort of cold war or at least another war, full stop, for no reason at all just because it threatned NK, when if it had just kept watch NK would not be getting all 'funny' and would not be so aware of international interest in which case any false move by NK would be more easily picked up, now NK will do most stuff in secret..well done Bush !

And as for going to war..I agree that our troops put themselves on the line and should be prepared to do so, but why should they put their lives on the line for a war that could have been avoided?

Bush is a plonker.

[damien©]

Yeah but we are talking about the Possibility of thousands of innocent people dying, not some car being nicked.

Innocent people are killed all the time.... aswell as Guilty ones neither of which are justified.

If your willing to sacrifice 10 men to save a hundred, who's better off the 10 men that were killed or 100 people who survived?

My point is that people are dying all over the world, some in your own country, yet we often only use images of people dying abroad to help motivate a certain political belief. Not to actually save the lives of others.

[KatzMotel]

Well only 3 nations have successfully Constructed and Maintained ICBMs, China, Russia and the US. I can't see how North Korea would be next on the list personally.

Personally this type of technology should be outlawed and permantly restricted whioch it's meant to be under the Non-Proliferation Treaty but if these "Top 5" countries inforced this properly then we wouldn't have the situation we have now.

With Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea developing Nuclear Weapons, all very unstable countries but without the support of the Top 5 wouldn't of been able to do this. It might be worth mentioning it was the US that helped Iran develop there Nuclear capabilities prior to the Overthrow of Government.
Don't France and the UK possess ICBMs? I do know that the United Kingdom at least has the means to deliver SLBMs with a 12000km range from their 'Vanguard' class submarines. And moreover, India already has nuclear weapons to my knowledge, and Pakistan's first test occurred around 1998, I believe.

The problem with the idea of 'outlawing' nuclear weapons is that it's impossible to 'uninvent' them, and there will always be somebody seeking to develop them. It is almost as if, I believe, these horrific weapons are actually stopping large nations fighting each other, due to the presence of a nuclear deterrent. If we look at the pre-nuclear age, what do we have? Two World Wars, which cost many millions of lives. Though attitudes have probably changed significantly in the international community from what they were like all those years ago, we cannot ignore this.

North Korea is like Iraq in Asia, it has to appear strong but really it's a very weak country that to be honest needs help, the country is starving and that's much to the fault of it's own leader.
I don't know, actually. Iraq was not as bad as one might think prior to the 1991 Gulf War. Certainly, as far as gender equality, the judicial system, education and trade were concerned, it was actually in some respects relatively impressive, especially considering the political climate of the country. Certainly compared to the state of Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini, it could have been seen as a secular, Western-style country. One could even go as far as saying the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party had done quite well. To that end, I guess it was natural that practically every major country funded and armed Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. :p But it was certainly not as underprivileged as the DPRK is, even after the 1991 Gulf War.

[Blaze Lord]

Wouldn't you agree it's fair to say, however, that things got much worse after the '91 War, when we told a certain group of Saddam fans that, while returning from Kuwait, should they march on Baghdad and overthrow Hussein, the US would back them up.. I mean.. They did. We didn't. Saddam got medieval. The truth is Iraq is a country that probably never should have existed. Though, we do get to point at a certain Kingdom for that one.

[damien©]

Though, we do get to point at a certain Kingdom for that one.

Well the United Kingdom was generally pushed out of the Regions after successive wars and made to give alot of it's "land" otherwise the US wouldn't help rebuild Europe. While they were occupying so much land in the Middle East and Africa.

Then when the Mandate finished for UK forces in alot of those areas, there was no Back Up plan to bring in a suitable government with proper boundaries and land control. Eg. Israel, Middle East and Africa

[KatzMotel]

Wouldn't you agree it's fair to say, however, that things got much worse after the '91 War, when we told a certain group of Saddam fans that, while returning from Kuwait, should they march on Baghdad and overthrow Hussein, the US would back them up.. I mean.. They did. We didn't. Saddam got medieval. The truth is Iraq is a country that probably never should have existed. Though, we do get to point at a certain Kingdom for that one.
Yes, things did get worse after the 1991 Gulf War- due to the damage inflicted to the country, Iraq was simply unable to maintain its public services to the level it did prior to the war.

As for your second comment, indeed the imperialism of the European powers have left scars all over the world, but I don't think that it is so relevant in this case. First of all, I believe Iraq came under British control via League of Nations mandate from the old Ottoman Empire territories. And in fact, Iraq was granted independence in 1932, prior even to Adolf Hitler declaring himself Führer und Reichskanzler. The reoccupation in 1941 was the result of British concern over the Iraqi oil supplies, and lasted only until 1947.

[Blaze Lord]

That's sort of true, but British control wasn't exactly just something thrust upon the UK that they reluctantly agreed to. The British actively kept a nation together that didn't want to remain one nation (e.g., Barzani). There's a reason why the default position in Iraq is civil war.

[bhafc87]

Funny thing is though is that although you can argue all night about the rights and wrongs of running someone elses country and the moral side of things, if you look through history and the countries the British Empire ran, well it is littered with countries that were well run by the British and economies were good etc....then when we left or in some cases forced to leave by war or by agreement, a lot of those countries have become poor and dictatorships and its a pointer to how well the British can run a country. Some of these nations are so corrupt and pointless. I mean look at Zimbabwe (??that how its spelt??) a prime example....not to mention many other African nations...

..before anyone has a go at me...I am not saying slavery or having an empire is a good thing and especially not aparthaid...but the principal that as son as we leave a nation after running it for a while it all goes belly up shows either how corrupt a some countries leaders are, or in the case of civil war..how inbred and stupid some countries peoples are....Take Iraq..saddam is gone and the fighting is worse than ever.....are they so stupid that they dont think...hang on if we stop fighting each other we can have a peaceful future....get on with it !! but oh no ! its religion getting in the way again !

Sorry, a bit of a rant but there you go

[bhafc87]

Anyway it has just taken China to sweet talk NK for NK to say they wont launch any more nukes..why couldnt bush do that? No, he had to go steaming in like a bull in a china shop.

See, I told you NK wont launch any at anyone

And as for condolina Rice saying "I dont believe NK has said this to China" what!! Are you looking for a war ??!!?? flippin woman..shut your mouth !

[Blaze Lord]

You know, after the Roman's went poof, didn't you guys have hundreds of years of what is popularly referred to as the Dark Ages? It was a long time before Alfred the Great came along, wasn't it?

It's a natural progression. It's what usually happens when a minority rules a majority, and then suddenly doesn't. It's about filling the vacuum. Sometime's it's a violent recompression.

Not about "inbreeding", ya dozy plonker.

[damien©]

Well you could argue the lack of anything "great" happening was down to the growth of Christianity and the message that it gave out of being Pure and Simple. This often Developed into as it were nothing happening. (Eg. Scientifically)

The reason I think alot of previous Colonies were "destroyed" after leaving was due to the way in which they left there was no smooth transition into Government for alot of these countries and boundaries was left unresolved and countries divided purely for ease which sometimes didn't make it easier for these areas or countries to co-exsist.

As the thing previously holding them together had gone.

[Blaze Lord]

Well you could argue the lack of anything "great" happening was down to the growth of Christianity and the message that it gave out of being Pure and Simple. This often Developed into as it were nothing happening. (Eg. Scientifically)

But I'm not talking about scientific advancements, I'm talking about war and political strife. After all, the Church did eventually fill that vacuum, the pope's crowning of Charlemagne. But there were hundreds of years between the fall of the Roman civilization and the rise of the Holy Roman Empire. Therefore, you could argue that the growth of Christianity wasn't the cause, it was the solution.

But I agree with the rest of what you said. It isn't as though British pull-outs of colonies was done in a way to ensure the colony/territory would be alright. One could argue it was done in a way in which strife was the only logical outcome, almost out of spite.

[damien©]

One could argue it was done in a way in which strife was the only logical outcome, almost out of spite.

I would agree with you there but I wouldn't necessarily say it was cause spite to the nations themselves more to the Political Pressure from other Countries in which they got to pull out of those territories/colonies.

I think there was huge mistakes made in order to collapse the British Empire and US themselves should be willing to accept some blame, obviously not solely.

I think solutions need to be found to resolve the economic crisis in alot of these countries and personally free-market economics isn't going to solve this what some people argue for. It will make the Rich, Richer and the Poor even worse off.