Why is North Korea ever included in the Olympics?

You don't actually think it means that the practice of killing innocents is being used more often do you?

 

Did anyone answer this.... the North Koreans at the Olympics are basically hostages... there so KJU doesn't blow up the Olympics. I hope he didn't have an argument with his sister, we all know how his family arguments end.

 

LOL! Where did I do that?

 

I think that's the point of the OP. Do we really need to be polite? I think the exact opposite. After all, these are people who share the same basic ideology of places like NK.

Think about all those kids dying of starvation in NK alone, or those people who died during Stalin's reign of terror, or Mao, or Pol Pot, or Castro...

I don't believe they deserve politeness. Rather, they deserve the exact opposite because if they had their way, we'd be starving in the streets like they do wherever leftists get their way.

 

You’re referring to a case involving a doctor working for the US gymnastics team, a sport that obviously isn’t even part of the Winter Olympics so it’s entirely irrelevant to this thread. If you want to make a case that we should stop supporting any and all Olympic sports on the basis of that single case (and any other justification you might want to present), you should really start a new thread for it. I don’t think it’s at all constructive to just fling off-topic assertions like yours in to threads like this one.

 

I guess you don't care about kids getting abused?

 

That’s a disgusting and totally unjustified accusation that I think you should retract.

I’d suggest that the starting a topic actually focused on the issue rather than sticking throw-away off-topic comments in other threads would demonstrate more real concern. All you’ve achieve here is a distraction from both topics.

 

I'll fix it for you.

 

KJU has shown no aversion to murdering his own people, when the mood strikes him.

That said, actually having banned NK may have solicited an attack from them.

It was a good decision to not impede NK in this olympics, simply because of proximity.

 

The harebrained false equivalencies between U.S. actions and oppressive regimes is what gets me most. No one could possibly sincerely believe that, so it's like a kid with crumbs down his shirt telling you that a monster came in and ate all the cookies...they don't believe it, and they know you don't believe it, yet they persist... except it's supposed "adults" doing it.

 

It means the double tap, which is the practice of killing innocents, so yes. You cannot consider first responders to be the enemy, according to the rules of war. It's the same as attacking the Red Cross on the battlefield.

 

Why would they want to kill first responders?

 

Who knows? Maybe so someone won't come save the life of a person they were trying to kill. Or maybe for maximum intimidation of populations. The only thing "public" is that they were doing it (under Obama, not sure about now); they didn't share their motivations.

 

No its not, double tap means 'double strike.' Hit them once and then when people respond, hit them again. Why can't this be practiced against enemy combatants?

Yeah, against government first responders - fire, police and paramedic.

 

OK, so you admit here that it is the first responders who are being attacked.

The first strike is against enemy combatants; the second is not. Again, enemy combatants (and everyone else) rush out after the first strike, first responders rush in.

Wrong. There is no requirement that first responders be government employees to be protected. That doesn't even make sense in a war scenario; how are you supposed to know who a doctor on the other side of a battlefield works for? The Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders are international organizations who work for no government, and they are off limits. Also, why would you assume that the people responding don't work for the local government?

 

Sure I am but the first responders aren't always non-enemy combatants.

Why can't the second strike also be against enemy combatants? Using your logic, a enemy camp with ONLY enemies in it, shouldn't be hit by a double tap drone strike because the first responders will be innocent.

Yeah my mistake. What I should've said is basically "non-enemy first responders."

I'm not assuming that. I acknowledge that they can be anyone - government, red cross etc. OR enemy combatants. Who they are assumed to be relies on accurate intelligence which should inform about the area which is to be hit. Unfortunately intelligence isn't always accurate.

 

But the drone strikes often weren't happening in "enemy camps", but local villages. If it was in an area known to contain only enemy combatants, that is different. But you better know, and I doubt the intel is that good.

Sometimes the intelligence tells you what would be convenient to hear. To be on the safe side, maybe just make the first strike sufficient?

 

The Olympics' primary reason for existence is to foster international good will.

Frankly, I'm not concerned with what happens within North Korea's borders. To each their own. So long as they remain non-imperialist. They'll get their nuclear bomb and that'll be it, perpetual peace. Nobody will attack a nuclear power for any reason.

 

Yeah, I was using an extreme example.

This is what I mean. And of course you better know.

Yep. 'Intelligence' fails all of the time.

I know what you're saying, but double tap is just such an effective technique which can kill alot of bad guys. I will say that if there is sufficient doubt that the intelligence is wrong, the strike should not occur.

 

You have no concern with the slaughtering and imprisonment of tens of thousands of innocent people?

 

Of course it bothers me on an ethical level, I mean from a military perspective. They should be left alone.

 

Not true, the IOC themselves responded to the story stating “there seems to have been a misunderstanding, we have not asked for the symbol to be removed"

https://twitter.com/iocmedia/status/963358023342284800


Also, if you've been watching the US women's hockey games, they've been wearing the statue of liberty helmet.

 

The Olympic Games are not supposed to be about politics.

 

Why is it hilarious? Many of them are kin. Even a guy like you would chose to side with a Democrat American rather than with a furriner.

 

They should be able to protect themselves now without a US presence.