Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. "Beloved Leader" Kim Jong-II upset on losing position of most evil tyrant

"Beloved Leader" Kim Jong-II upset on losing position of most evil tyrant

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
20 Posts 7 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R Rob Graham

    How refreshingly honest of the poisonous little toad. Maybe we could put up a few $B for his prompt assassination. In fact, how about an ongoing endowment dedicated to insuring the top three in that poll never repeat.

    V Offline
    V Offline
    Vikram A Punathambekar
    wrote on last edited by
    #6

    North Korea was a better case for invasion than Iraq.

    Cheers, Vıkram.

    Carpe Diem.

    R 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • V Vikram A Punathambekar

      North Korea was a better case for invasion than Iraq.

      Cheers, Vıkram.

      Carpe Diem.

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Rob Graham
      wrote on last edited by
      #7

      But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN, and the chinese helped NK nearly kick our ass. Given that the Chinese still seem more likely to help NK than us, we will never likely do that.

      V L 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • R Rob Graham

        But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN, and the chinese helped NK nearly kick our ass. Given that the Chinese still seem more likely to help NK than us, we will never likely do that.

        V Offline
        V Offline
        Vikram A Punathambekar
        wrote on last edited by
        #8

        It is extremely unlikely China would go to war with the US today over NK. War against the UN, even more unlikely.

        Cheers, Vıkram.

        Carpe Diem.

        O 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • V Vikram A Punathambekar

          It is extremely unlikely China would go to war with the US today over NK. War against the UN, even more unlikely.

          Cheers, Vıkram.

          Carpe Diem.

          O Offline
          O Offline
          Oakman
          wrote on last edited by
          #9

          Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:

          It is extremely unlikely China would go to war with the US today over NK. War against the UN, even more unlikely.

          That's the way I feel about India going after Pakistan. I'm sure China wouldn't defend her ally.

          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

          V 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • O Oakman

            Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:

            It is extremely unlikely China would go to war with the US today over NK. War against the UN, even more unlikely.

            That's the way I feel about India going after Pakistan. I'm sure China wouldn't defend her ally.

            Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

            V Offline
            V Offline
            Vikram A Punathambekar
            wrote on last edited by
            #10

            China is way stronger than India. She isn't as strong as the US. Still, doesn't necessarily mean China will enter the war if India attacks Pakistan. Good try though.

            Cheers, Vıkram.

            Carpe Diem.

            O 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • V Vikram A Punathambekar

              China is way stronger than India. She isn't as strong as the US. Still, doesn't necessarily mean China will enter the war if India attacks Pakistan. Good try though.

              Cheers, Vıkram.

              Carpe Diem.

              O Offline
              O Offline
              Oakman
              wrote on last edited by
              #11

              Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:

              Good try though.

              "let's you and him fight" is a fun game.

              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • R Rob Graham

                But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN, and the chinese helped NK nearly kick our ass. Given that the Chinese still seem more likely to help NK than us, we will never likely do that.

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Lost User
                wrote on last edited by
                #12

                Rob Graham wrote:

                But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN

                The UN Security Council at that time being the USA, UK, France, Republic of China (Formosa - now Taiwan), and the USSR. The USSR was sulking and not attending Security Council meetings. Effectively, then, the USA defended South Korea at the behest of the USA.

                Bob Emmett

                Y R 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • L Lost User

                  Rob Graham wrote:

                  But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN

                  The UN Security Council at that time being the USA, UK, France, Republic of China (Formosa - now Taiwan), and the USSR. The USSR was sulking and not attending Security Council meetings. Effectively, then, the USA defended South Korea at the behest of the USA.

                  Bob Emmett

                  Y Offline
                  Y Offline
                  Yusuf
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #13

                  and how is that different from today UN Security Council? Except you have extra 10 mannequins sitting around the table.

                  Yusuf Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]

                  L 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:

                    A political pundit was quoted as saying ...

                    No name against which to authenticate the quote? Hell, everyone who posts here is a political pundit, and I don't believe any of you. :-D

                    Bob Emmett

                    Y Offline
                    Y Offline
                    Yusuf
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #14

                    Bob Emmett wrote:

                    Vikram A Punathambekar wrote: A political pundit was quoted as saying ... No name against which to authenticate the quote?

                    what difference it makes. Name by it self does not mean anything. Any one can make any name.

                    Bob Emmett wrote:

                    Hell, everyone who posts here is a political pundit, and I don't believe any of you

                    Even Kim Jong-II :-D

                    Yusuf Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • Y Yusuf

                      and how is that different from today UN Security Council? Except you have extra 10 mannequins sitting around the table.

                      Yusuf Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Lost User
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #15

                      Yusuf.A wrote:

                      and how is that different from today UN Security Council?

                      Um, not much?

                      Bob Emmett

                      Y 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Lost User

                        Yusuf.A wrote:

                        and how is that different from today UN Security Council?

                        Um, not much?

                        Bob Emmett

                        Y Offline
                        Y Offline
                        Yusuf
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #16

                        :doh: :rolleyes: :^)

                        Yusuf Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • L Lost User

                          Rob Graham wrote:

                          But we had already done that once at the behest of the UN

                          The UN Security Council at that time being the USA, UK, France, Republic of China (Formosa - now Taiwan), and the USSR. The USSR was sulking and not attending Security Council meetings. Effectively, then, the USA defended South Korea at the behest of the USA.

                          Bob Emmett

                          R Offline
                          R Offline
                          Rob Graham
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #17

                          Hey, we had to get France to agree, never an easy challenge. Then of course NK had nothing of interest to France, so the French didn't care what happened to NK much.

                          L 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • Y Yusuf

                            Bob Emmett wrote:

                            Vikram A Punathambekar wrote: A political pundit was quoted as saying ... No name against which to authenticate the quote?

                            what difference it makes. Name by it self does not mean anything. Any one can make any name.

                            Bob Emmett wrote:

                            Hell, everyone who posts here is a political pundit, and I don't believe any of you

                            Even Kim Jong-II :-D

                            Yusuf Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]

                            L Offline
                            L Offline
                            Lost User
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #18

                            Yusuf.A wrote:

                            Name by it self does not mean anything. Any one can make any name.

                            True. But if the article attributed names to the pollsters and the pundit, I could investigate the validity of the poll and the merit of the pundit. As the article is in the Daily Star, my immediate assumption is that there was no such poll, and that the pundit was someone with no more knowledge of Kim Jong-II's state of mind than I have, i.e. none other than the guy writing the article.

                            Yusuf.A wrote:

                            Even Kim Jong-II

                            He posts here? :(

                            Bob Emmett

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • R Rob Graham

                              Hey, we had to get France to agree, never an easy challenge. Then of course NK had nothing of interest to France, so the French didn't care what happened to NK much.

                              L Offline
                              L Offline
                              Lost User
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #19

                              Rob Graham wrote:

                              so the French didn't care what happened to NK much.

                              The French were fighting the Viet Minh (communists and nationalists) trying to hang on to French Indochina. As the USSR and China recognised the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, the French needed the USA. The UK and USA had their 'special relationship'. The Republic of China would not have existed without the USA. All sewn up then.

                              Bob Emmett

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • V Vikram A Punathambekar

                                North Korea's supreme leader Kim Jong-II has expressed his agitation on being overthrown in an annual poll that names the world's worst dictators [...] A political pundit was quoted as saying, "He (Jong-II) genuinely craves notoriety on the world stage and is privately seething he is no longer regarded as the most evil leader."[^]

                                :omg: Dictators in our backyard like Musharraf had some pretence of ruling-in-the-interest-of-what's-good-for-the-country. This guy is *upset* he's not considered the most evil any more? :eek:

                                Cheers, Vıkram.

                                Carpe Diem.

                                V Offline
                                V Offline
                                Vincent Reynolds
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #20

                                I don't think the article is serious. It doesn't name a source, and both article and quote misspell the Korean leader's name (it should be Kim Jong-il, Kim Jong Il, or maybe Li'l Kim :)).

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                Reply
                                • Reply as topic
                                Log in to reply
                                • Oldest to Newest
                                • Newest to Oldest
                                • Most Votes


                                • Login

                                • Don't have an account? Register

                                • Login or register to search.
                                • First post
                                  Last post
                                0
                                • Categories
                                • Recent
                                • Tags
                                • Popular
                                • World
                                • Users
                                • Groups