Should The Un Impose Sanctions On North Korea?

Should the UN impose sanctions on North Korea?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

B

Ben_Unbanned

Guest
Remember that our South Korean friends make everything possible for GP and GPH.
So if North Koreans decide to cause major trouble, our South Korean friends surely will be affected.

Should the UN impose sanctions on North Korea?

Nth Korea vows to continue missile tests



A defiant North Korea acknowledged for the first time on Thursday that it had launched a missile, vowed to carry out more tests and threatened to use force if the international community tried to stop it.

Pyongyang's statement came as the United States and Japan closed ranks in the face of a UN Security Council split over whether to slap sanctions on North Korea over the volley of missiles it fired off on Wednesday.


"The successful missile test was part of a regular military exercise conducted by our military to boost our self-defence," Yonhap news agency quoted a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman as saying on KRT state television.

"If anyone tries to discuss the rights and wrongs about (future tests) and apply pressure, we will be forced to take physical actions of a different nature."

Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and US President George W Bush, speaking by telephone, agreed to work together for a UN resolution demanding that nations halt funds and technology that could be used for Pyongyang's missile program.

Their call, reported by Japan's Kyodo news agency, came after Russia and China opposed slapping sanctions on North Korea - echoing the split among the UN Security Council's veto-wielding members over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

North Korea launched at least six missiles from its east coast early on Wednesday.

As the international community fumed, it launched a seventh some 12 hours later, Japanese and South Korean officials said.

The missiles included a long-range Taepodong-2, which some experts had said could hit Alaska.

US officials said it flew for only about 40 seconds before splashing into the sea west of Japan.

South Korea's defence minister told a parliamentary committee that an analysis of equipment and personnel being moved in and out of a missile-launch site in North Korea suggested the possibility of additional launches, Yonhap reported.

South Korean daily Chosun Ilbo cited a government official as saying the North might be looking to launch three or four more intermediate-range missiles.

And NBC News, citing unnamed US officials, said preparations appeared to be under way for a second Taepodong test, but the weapon was not yet at the launch pad.

Experts say it takes days, if not weeks, to prepare a Taepodong-2 for firing. Tokyo said it did not expect an imminent launch.

In Washington, Bush said the missile tests further isolated North Korea but did not diminish his desire to resolve a standoff over its nuclear and missile programs.

Six-country talks on ending the North's nuclear ambitions have been stalled since last November.

Yahoo News
 
I dont see how they dont have the same " rights" as usa/russia/france/and so on, so why should they be treated different?
 
I really don't see what the problem is. I mean most countries in the world test their weapons, so why is there an uproar when North Korea test theirs? Is it some cold-war style communism thing?

Honestly, I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. Only a few weeks ago people where all excited about America planning to test the biggest non-nuclear bomb ever made in Nevada. A country that isn't an ally has a firework by comparison and people are upset.

Everyone seems to have double-standards. It is not as if the West make Happy Bombs or something, that people like to have dropped on them.

In the end its all fun and games until someone loses a bollock.
 
Vimacs posted on Jul 6 2006 at 08:30 PM said:
I dont see how they dont have the same " rights" as usa/russia/france/and so on, so why should they be treated different?
Are these non-nuclear?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No one knows if they really have nuclear weapons -- they claim they have -- but there is no real proof.

The things that are causing the fuss are missiles, in particular a new long range one that could potentially cross the Pacific. They are very likely design to be able to carry a nuclear warhead, but in these tests there would be no need to even have a warhead because they are being ditched in the sea.
 
If they let N. Korea continue with their nuclear bombage testing, and then continue to go after Iran it will annoy me so yes.
 
The thing is that north korea actualy have sthem, so they arein the cluv of loved people, they wont touch them.
But iran dosnt have them, but hey they have oil and theres a chance that they may have them in the future, so lets bomb the shitt out of em!
 
YEAH GUYS LETS LET NORTH KOREA SHOOT LONG RANGE MISSLES INTO THE SEA OF JAPAN. HELL GUYS IF WE CAN HAVE NUKES THEN THAT NATION RULED BY AN INSANE DICTATOR WHO THREATENED OTHER COUTRIES WITH NUCLEAR WAR JUST THIS WEEK SHOULD BE ABLE TO! HELL WHO NEEDS NUCLEAR TREATIES AND CONTAINED UNDERGROUND TESTING WITHIN OUR OWN BORDERS?

Jesus christ you people are ignorant about current affairs.
 
Crazy or not, he knows, should he launch a nuclear strike on, well, anyone, he'd fry too, with thousands, if not millions of his own citizens. He might not care about his people, but I bet he doesn't harbor any suicidal thoughts. Also, it's not like he can do a strike all by himself, and guys ultimately in the controls are most likely not crazy.

And, while the current US prez isn't a dictator, I would question his sanity, or atleast his intellect. :p


You know, it seems, that many small countries run by dictators threaten their neighbors, and the world in general, with fire and bombs and destruction... Yet, lately it has been US, the flagship of democracy and freedom, who actually systematically blow stuff up. Well, them and Israel. :(
 
Jarska333 posted on Jul 7 2006 at 11:14 AM said:
And, while the current US prez isn't a dictator, I would question his sanity, or atleast his intellect. :p
HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Should The Un Impose Sanctions On North Korea?

I have no idea, I don't even know what it means as politics and I don't mix. I put politics in the same box as car engines, men and football, they all completely baffle me :D .
 
Well, the usa threatend iran with atom bombs like a month ok, thats ok huh?
Cause its our big loved usa that never does something wrong and is ruled by a pink fluffy bunny.
 
Vimacs posted on Jul 7 2006 at 01:57 PM said:
Well, the usa threatend iran with atom bombs like a month ok, thats ok huh?
Cause its our big loved usa that never does something wrong and is ruled by a pink fluffy bunny.
O'Kay, so what does "impose sanctions" mean? And please don't laugh okay, I really don't know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it means that the guy in charge of North Koria won't be allowed to go to all of the cool parties with George Bush and Tony Blair. It has some other, boring effects aswell, such other countries blocking ingoing and outgoing trade, blocking visa's, removing diplomatic rights, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanction.
 
Vimacs posted on Jul 7 2006 at 02:57 PM said:
Well, the usa threatend iran with atom bombs like a month ok, thats ok huh?
Cause its our big loved usa that never does something wrong and is ruled by a pink fluffy bunny.
My vision exactly, weird people...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I seriously could see this argument from both sides.

On one hand , I feel that N. Korea has the right to develop missles, and defend themselves in the event of a war.

However I also feel that they are going about this the entire wrong way. I mean, they've now threatened the US quite a few times, even to the respect of:

If the US and other countries make the decision to take out one of those missles, and the US conducts the mission, they will take that as an act of war, and fire nuclear missiles at the US!

So I can see it both ways, but they are going about this the wrong way, and all countries agree that this is very serious mattrer that none of us can take lightly.

DSR
 
Of course they should. The USA is the only country responsible enough to possess a nuclear deterrent. Any other country might end up dropping them on cities full of civilians. The USA would never do that.....again.......would they ?
 
Back
Top