The people who say that we should go after North Korea more are also the people who push for more inspections which Iraq. Saddam is FINALLY (supposively) destroying missles (6 out of the 100s that we know of) that we found, and according to a number of articles, is even "willing" to talk about some VX gas (funny, why didn\'t they say this in the first place?). Its not like we are "disregarding" their opinion. But letting up on Iraq now, could also mean that NK (which is still an apple to orange comparison. More on this later) will get more belligerant and dangerous. Also, supposing that Saddam is finally admitting what is obvious (after 3 months of inspections, 12 [count em] 12 years of deceit, does that mean what he is trying to do now for real?), what is the weapons he is NOT talking about?
Also, it is an apple to orange case. Iraq is surrounded by Middle Eastern nations that, are partly with Saddam, and are not, say any local "super powers" other then Europe (which France and Germany being behind Iraq) and Israel (Israel having any influence with Iraq? :rolleyes: ). If anything, England and the US are pretty much the only ones who are taking the Iraq situation seriously (it took the UN a month or so to get the resoultion passed, and another 2 or so months to admit that the resolutions HAVE been violated and are waiting for the UN to come up with an appropriate action [which for the French...is more "inspections"]). North Korea on the other hand, has Russia, China, Japan, and South Korea. NONE (especailly China) WANT a nuclear Korean Peninsula (a nuclear Korean Peninsula could lead to a local arms race with Japan getting nukes. Which is NOT goog for China). Currently, we ARE (yes, we didn\'t ignore North Korea) trying to get China to lean on North Korea more since China is "buddie buddies" with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il. South Korea is trying to open talks as well. US isn\'t alone when it comes to North Korea despite the rheteric of the North Koreans and the media slant.
As for it being about "oil", again, the argument has been refuted by the original refutation. Now, yes, the simple fact that Iraq has oil could be good news to the US (as well as other nations I might add since it would add a LOT more oil to the open [keyword here, open] market). Now, this is supposing that Saddam doesn\'t blow them up. If Saddam does blow them up (well documented that HE will go this route when attacked), it helps nobody. If it was solely about the oil, simply lifting the sanctions would be a LOT better economically to the oil arguement (not good for the Iraqs, but who cares about the Iraqis when we could have cheap oil right?).
As for Afganisthan, so what? Again, like Iraq, the pipeline will help the Afganisthan. The same way as Iraq will help the local people.
[edit]Also, just because you have the right to do something, doesn\'t make you "patriotic".
Definition of patriotism according to the American Herritage Dictionary...
SYLLABICATION: pa·tri·ot·ism
PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: ptr--tzm KEY
NOUN: Love of and devotion to one\'s country.
Many of the people who ARE in those parades, they do NOT have the love and devotion to one\'s country (that being the United States).
Now, before you flame me, did I say that "all anti-War protesters are \'unpatriotic\'"? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There ARE anti-war people who ARE patriotic! All I\'m saying, many of the ones protesting, carrying the signs, are NOT patriotic (the Bush is a Facist, America is a Terrorist State, Bush is a Moron, Blood Not Oil crowd). NOT THE SCINCERE ANTI-WAR PERSON WHO SIMPLELY DOESN\'T WANT WAR!
