Londonrake wrote:Robin Hood wrote:IMO: One thing is for sure ..... Kim is NOT going to give up his weapons just to please the US, he is too smart to fall for that on US promises. Both Presidents will demand the US takes their own nukes out of Sth Korea and will insist on a time scale for the removal of US forces from the peninsular when/if the peninsular reverts to being a united Korea.
Outside of NK you seem to be one of the few people (carefully avoiding the likes of "total idiot", "wanker", etc) who seem to think that the idea of a 3rd generation, Stalinist, paranoid demi-god dictator, who - for instance - has had members of his own family murdered - having the capability to incinerate London/Paris/New York/ et al is a good idea.
I mean is it me? Or, a reasonable conclusion, that the person promoting that idea is a total twat? Is that libelous? Will I get a visit from the Russian/Polish/Cypriot Souni community?
Why not complain to the site owner and tell him you feel threatened .... that's what you normally do? Twat!
Yes it's just you! Common sense says he would be a fool, which he is not, to trust the US. The only reason the US has not attacked him is because HE does have a nuclear deterrent. Ghadaffi and Sadam gave up theirs to a US assurance and Syria never had them so, once there is no deterrent to US aggression and, backed by its poodles, they attack on some pretext or another ..... I belief the current reason is
'Humanitarian Intervention'