Update: WE ARE BACK ONLINE! The Forum has been RESTORED! See announcement here. If there are any problems or issues, please report them in the announcement thread. Note: Unfortunately I was not able to import the posts made after the crash (on Sept 18) into the restored forum. However, I exported all the posts submitted after the crash into a Word file, so you can download it, find your posts and re-post them. Download the posts here. Thanks for your patience and welcome back everyone!
Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss conspiracies, mysteries and paranormal phenomena.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
The U.S. only invades dictatorships when it stands to gain something from doing so. It has nothing to do with morality. Lil' Kim in North Korea just gets slaps on the wrist when he acts up, and he does crazier, more dangerous shit than any of the dictators the U.S. took down I think. Kimmy alone is able to destabilize an entire region and may not be totally there in his head...just like his old man. And NK potentially threatens the U.S., China, Japan, South Korea, and virtually all of Asia. But does the U.S. launch an ivasion to get rid of him? Of course not. Nothing much to gain from it. Status, maybe, but the U.S. populace is war weary. Not that stops daddygov from going to war continually anyway. I've read before that NK is one of the few nations left that does not have a central bank and is therefore not infected with the consumerism, "development," globalization bug.