Ten oz

I provided examples which you willfully ignored. You want to address my question in context so you are creating side debate to fillibuster. I gave you a cutoff when I explained when North Korea came to exist. The Korea War is part of what created North Korea. They need to have existed before you can start claiming they attacked nations. Since you refuse to have an honest discuss there is no point in continuing. You are refusing to address the bulk of the questions I ask while totally misrepresenting the ones you are choosing to address. While insulting me with false claims that I am moving the goal posts. It accomplishes nothing. You aren't looking for a real discuss and I am not going to waste my day being trolled by you because my comments challange the limits of what you know and are able to respond to without making concessions you don't seem willing to make. It is this same contrived sense of looming danger and blunt refusal to acknowledge our own hypocrisy that pushed us (U.S.) into a massive mistake in Iraq.

Look through the links above. North Korea challanged Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. This isn't new. I am very familiar with the history. It is one of the reason why I don't believe Trump can just bully his way through this with threats.

Which brings us back to the coversation about which nations North Korea attacked. One doesn't have to go back 67yrs to references the U.S. attacking another nation. While history matters the current situation has little to do with what North Korea did in 2012. This is about spirally rhectoric as both Kim Jong-un and Trump play a dangerous game of one upmanship. I already posted links showing that North Korea has a history of challanging each new U.S. administration. In this case inexperience and a need to freestyle on social media is making things crazy. Trump and Kim are going back and worth meanwhile no one seems to be able to communicate what either side even wants.

1 - Per Korean war the North was occupied by the USSR and the South by the United State. North Korea was not formerly its own nation. Separate govts were formed in 1948 and the Korean war followed from 1950-1953. They only example of North Korea attacking another nation you can provide is the cold war pressured quasi civil war which created North Korea to begin with? I take it you concede there have been no attacks on other nations since then? The ideology that governs North Korea today was created post the Korea war in 1955: "The Juche ideology is the cornerstone of party works and government operations. It is viewed by the official North Korean line as an embodiment of Kim Il-sung's wisdom, an expression of his leadership, and an idea which provides "a complete answer to any question that arises in the struggle for national liberation".[152] Juche was pronounced in December 1955 in order to emphasize a Korea-centered revolution.[152] Its core tenets are economic self-sufficiency, military self-reliance and an independent foreign policy. The roots of Juche were made up of a complex mixture of factors, including the cult of personality centered on Kim Il-sung, the conflict with pro-Soviet and pro-Chinese dissenters, and Korea's centuries-long struggle for independence." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#Political_and_legal_status 2 - I listed 3 things and then provided 3 examples for context to illustrate what I was referencing. My example of U.S. proliferation was the giving Saddam gas and helping Pakistan get nukes. You are completely ignoring the the question in its context and instead implying a separate one based on formalities. That is fine. You can duck questions all you want just stop pretending I am moving the goals.

Above is the original qoute. Not goal posts moved. In context of the full post I made 2 points both of which are directed towards the current stand off. You have provided links referencing old rhetoric from Kim Jong-il mostly. Your most recent explainof North Korea threatening South Korea is 5yrs old. That doesn't justify pre-emptive action today. As this showdown plays out North Korea has not been threatening South Korea. North Korea even went out of its way to issue a statement singling out the U.S. as the "only" nation is its crosshairs. More over South Korea is pointing the finger at both sides asking the saberrattling to stop.Additionally you have not even attempted to address the other part of the post questioning what Trump's official position is. What are we asking/demanding North Korea do at this moment to ease tensions?

The "on many sides" remark by Trump is shameful. This has been a line used throughout to 2016 campaign and continues now. Most reasonable people have a natural tendency to accept some give and take with concessions. Direct finger pointing can often seem extreme or rude. Trump supporters take advantage of the compromising natural of the majority. When Trump gets caught in lies his supporters lamant that Hillary Clinton also lies or that all politicians lie. The bothsides do it argument are used to down play all manners of unethical behavior by implying parity in all individuals responsibility to a situation. There isn't always parity though and bothside don't always share blame. This platitude needs to be more abrasively confronted for what it is. Saying "on many sides" is just a way to avoid criticizing his supporters.

Yes to one and three; which nation did North Korea invade and which nation did North Korea give WMDs to?

@ Zapatos, You can not provide a link showing that North Korea, "regarding what is happening", has made threats to South Korea. You listed things done years ago and mostly by Kim Jong-il. Currently North Korea is not threatening South Korea. Kim Jong-un even released a statement saying he would ONLY use nuclear weapons against the U.S. and no other countries if North Korea is attacked. Additionally South Korea is scolding both sides for the language. Upset with both the U.S. and North Korea: "After Mr. Moon talked with Mr. Trump on the phone on Monday, his office said he emphasized that “South Korea can never accept a war erupting again on the Korean Peninsula.” On Thursday, his office said the escalation of military tensions or an armed clash would “not help any country.” Leaders of Mr. Moon’s governing Democratic Party had more pointed jabs for Washington. “High-ranking American officials too should refrain from using excessive language,” said the party’s chairwoman, Choo Mi-ae, without mentioning Mr. Trump by name. “Their impromptu and not-carefully-thought-out messages only serve to worsen the situation and play into the hands of North Korea’s shrewd intentions.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/asia/trump-north-korea-threat.html

I asked: "Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea?" You responded with links regarding what a potential threat North Korea. Not what steps the Trump admin is demanding for de-escalation or direct threats North Korea has made against South Korea. What they are technically capable of and what they has threatened to do are not one in the same.

Can you provide of a link showing that the White House has made any clear demands regarding what is happening with regards to North Korean citizens or a link showing a clear threat against South Korea made by North Korea? To my knowledge my govt's official position isn't demading anything specific: "We do not seek a regime change, we do not seek the collapse of the regime, we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel," said Mr Tillerson, referring to the border between the Koreas " http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40797613

What does Kim Jong-un want? What are we demanding? I don't think the question to either is currently known.

Has North Korea ever attacked any other nation, have they ever used WMDs against anyone, have they participated in the proliferation of WMDs? The U.S. has done all the above multiple times. We (USA) have pre-emptively invaded countries, used nuclear weapons, armed Saddam with gas and helped Pakistan get Nukes. To some extent action speak loudly as words. If we dispassionately look at our histories it seems more likely that we (USA) would act first. Even within the context of the strong rhetoric Kim Jong-un is not expressing a desire to attack us first. Rather Kim Jong-on is carrying on about how fiercely North Korea would retaliate. North Korea's red line is being attacked. Trump's red line looks like a rorschach test. Can you explain what the Trump administration wants or would accept which would de-escalate the situation? The U.S. currently doesn't have an expressed goal. We are not asking for Kim Jong-un's regime to be removed, not asking for their military to disarm, not demanding they withdrawn troops from someplace, or etc. With Afghanistan the goal was Al Qaeda. We told the Taliban govt to hand over Al Qaeda leaders or else we'd come for Al Qaeda and them (Taliban). In Iraq the goal was to remove Saddam from power and disarm the country of WMD's (something they didn't have). Agree or disagree with Afghanistan and Iraq wars or not at least there were stated goals known to all in advance. What is the goal in North Korea? State Dept, Rex Tillerson, said the U.S. is not seeking regime change. So what are we seeking? I will need to know they answer to that before supporting military action by my govt on my behalf.

Happiness is a choice for the most part. No one can make someone happy if that person chooses not to be. Contentment exists solely in ones mind. The number of partners doesn't matter.

I say no, at least not in the long run. Eventually as time passes ones life changes enough, or should change enoough, that the former partners simply no long fit in to ones current life. Some people stagnate. They are born and rasied in one place where they choose to stay for college and then employment. Through the decades their friends, habits, hang outs, and etc don't change. For those people former partners might pose a problem because they aren't evolving. Assuming one experiences personnal growth and leaves the nest to pursue a life I don't believe past partners matter as they cease to fit and have a place in ones life. I had the same girlfriend from 15-20yrs of age. It was a very strong relationship with powerful feelings. However so much has happened in my life since I was 20yrs old I wouldn't even know where to begin if my ex and I sat down for coffee. Too much has changed. We simply do not know each other. I can reminisce in my mind about our time together but it isn't real. I remember a girl, a yound kid, I don't know the woman she now is and vice versa. I remember her much the same way I remember old styles of clothing, my favorite childhood toys, my first crappy job, and etc. The memories are pleasant but I don't dress that way anymore, I don't play with toys anymore, I have rewarding career rather than a crappy job, and etc.

Pakistan is a Nuclear Power. Didn't stop us (U.S.) from sending our teams in after OBL. Hasn't stopped us from using drones and special forces on Paksitan's side of the Durand Line. Our use of force in Pakistan without their permission could very easily be considered acts of of war.

Segregation, Japanese interment, and etc existed under FDR. Anger still had its outlet.

What's so sad is that nearly everyone acknowledges this but still votes against their own self interest out of bigotry and or self righteousness. As dimreepr said we are a culture fixated on revenge. Many people vote in a vengeful way with the intent on hurting, not improving, things.

Every new thing North Korea does is considered a step beyond the redline. You insist their current capabilities have finally put the situation at critical mass but we have been here before. Bush laid out the threat posed by North Korea as urgent in his Axis of Evil speech. Simply possessing WMDs made North Korea an immediate threat to the U.S. and its neighbors was the claim. You say this time it is serious but such has always been said. In 93' when they conducted they first nuclear detonation test it was considered leaps beyond the redline. Perhaps you are too young or weren't following the news before and don't recall the rhetoric throughout the decades. Maybe this is the first time in real time you are reading headlines saying "this time" North Korea can do X, Y, and Z. It isn't new. This also is far from the first time the capability of a potential foe has been used to justify action. It is why we went into Iraq. Remember when headlines said Iraq was working on Nukes? How'd that turn out. Can you name a war started pre-emptively which in hindsight is not viewed as a mistake?

What is true today that wasn't true a year ago, 10yrs ago, 20yrs ago, etc? You say China is risking war but in my last post I outlined the challenge North Korea has posed to the U.S. for decades now. It seems that then only thing which has changed is the diplomatic experience and patience in White House. I don't think it is correct/fair to expect China to shift decades worth of policies over night because the new U.S. President only knows how to threaten. The position this White House finds itself in is not unique or new.

Interesting article by the Washington Post today outlining the close relationship North Korea had with Grenada at the end of the 70's into the early 80's and the impact Reagan's "Operation Urgent" had on the way North Korea views the U.S. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/08/09/the-reagan-era-invasion-that-drove-north-korea-to-develop-nuclear-weapons/?utm_term=.d3594dff2106 Reading about Reagan's invasion of Grenada got me thinking about the way relations with North Korea with North Korea has played out over time. The Nuceal program in North Korea has been known about since the 1980's. Every U.S. President for nearly 40yrs has had to deal with North Korea. Below are some key dates because they show how Donald Trump's last 3 predecessors were all challanged early by North Korea and dealing with North Korea persisted throughout their administrations. I think it is also important to note that despite belabored relations and political pressure from within a shot was never fired By Bill Clinton, George Bush, or Barrack Obama. Now we are just 7 month in to Trump's admin and 1985 - North Korea signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. They never fully complied. 1993- "On 1 April 1993, the IAEA concluded that North Korea was in non-compliance with its Safeguards Agreement, and referred this to the UN Security Council. Following UN Security Council resolution 825, which called upon the DPRK to reconsider its decision to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow weapons inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) into the country, North Korea "suspended the effectuation" of that withdrawal in June 1993 " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreed_Framework 1994 - " President Clinton approved a plan today to arrange more than $4 billion in energy aid to North Korea during the next decade in return for a commitment from the country's hard-line Communist leadership to freeze and gradually dismantle its nuclear weapons development program. " http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/19/world/clinton-approves-a-plan-to-give-aid-to-north-koreans.html?pagewanted=all 2001(03) - "by early 2001, some of us were questioning whether the agreement was the best way to achieve the goal of eliminating North Korea's nuclear capacity. And in October 2002, the North Koreans admitted to American diplomats that they had been operating a clandestine uranium enrichment program, in violation of the agreement and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. In response, the West's oil shipments to North Korea were suspended, and the International Atomic Energy Agency unanimously adopted a resolution warning that the nuclear program was a violation of the North's commitments. In January 2003, North Korea formally withdrew from the nonproliferation treaty." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/opinion/what-bush-did-right-on-north-korea.html 2007 - President Bush, directly engaging the man he publicly called a “tyrant,” wrote a letter to North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-il, in which he held out the prospect of normalized relations with the United States if North Korea fully disclosed its nuclear programs and dismantled its nuclear reactor, administration officials said Thursday. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/world/asia/07korea.html 2009 - "Facing the first direct challenge to his administration by an emerging Nuclear Weapons state, President Obama declared Monday that the United States and its allies would “stand up” to North Korea hours after that country defied international sanctions and conducted what appeared to be its second nuclear test." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/world/asia/26nuke.html 2016 - "The Obama administration announced on Wednesday that it was imposing sanctions on North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, personally, blacklisting the unpredictable ruler and top officials in his reclusive government for human rights abuses as he aggressively presses forward with his Nuclear ballistic Missile programs." https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/07/world/asia/obama-puts-sanctions-on-north-korean-leaders-for-human-rights-abuse.html -

If the sun blowing and eliminating your great great great great great great great grand children does not matter why does Lucy matter? If Lucy matters why do you justify so much B.S. via tribalism?

No one that "matters" experienced Lucy either. Regardless of handed along DNA one's own life and the lives of all potential carriers of genes end. The people you impact during your life will eventually be lost as will all lives effected by them and extra. There is no insulation for it. And that is okay. I have not existed before. We all have not existed before.

@ tar, all life eventually will end. The sun will engulf the earth. Eventually the universe will end like. As a result even holding out hope that out dna will continue on has an end. Nothing about us will exist for infinity. Life is finite no matter how one sings it.

@ tar, a little of us were there when the first fish took a breath of air. However I think the OP is referring to his mind/sense of self. It is the mind where a person would have issues coping.

It is all perspective though isn't it? Who writes the legal set of rules often determines who views those rules as fair. The U.S. is 5% of the world's population and consumes 25% of the world's resources. Some around the world consider that shameful or something to feel guilty about. The top 10% of wealthiest families in the world own 92% of the world's stock markets; "greed is good". Trump Twitter trolled his way to elected office and the GOP got themselves a lifetime SCOTUS appointment after shamelessly blocking Obama's pick for a year. I agree with you in spirit. I certainly wish what you are saying was absolute but it doesn't seem to be. Those without shame, without guilt, and etc certainly seem to be reaping the benefits of it.