[Ravishing Rick Rude]

Originally posted by The Strangler
My response was to the argument of "Well if you go against Iraq because they have a tyrannical dictator, why not China and North Korea?" It was in that context that I answered.

China has improved a lot in terms of human rights, but that doesn't mean that they are without reproach. Their history speaks for itself in terms of horrors committed on their own people. But then again, long term diplomatic pressure and western influence has also made them very near a capitalistic society, and I think that after the current dictator dies there is a very good chance it will be a democratic society as well.

North Korea is another matter, but once again I think they really don't care about who they nuke, but I also think they just want some more monetary support. They are like the whiny baby who wants more candy (except this whiny baby has a .357 magnum with the safety on). Plus they have not shown any tendency towards expansion or hawkishness, unlike Iraq.

Iraq has a long history under Saddam of trying to rule the entirety of the Gulf region. Saddam has spent the better part of his dictatorship at war with his brothers and sisters, and even tried to develop nuclear weapons before during their 10 year conflict with Iran (thank god for Isreal bombing their reactor back in 1981). Only 2 years after the war with Iran ended, Saddam attacked Kuwait. Then after that war he has spent the last 12 years defying the UN and developing more and more banned weapons. There is not reason to believe that Saddam WON'T try and conquer the Middle East again. All of these reasons are why I believe that Iraq has garnered so much attention compared to other oppressed nations.

Excellent post, but with one addition perhaps, you say Korea really might not care who they nuke, that's the only thing i disagree with, i don't think they really have the minerals to attack, if they do, China cuts them off cold .... wouldn't be good for there economy