north koreans doing tests on babies, just like the nazis did Options

[Seeker]

According to this article North Korea has several concentration camps where they perform experiments on people and breed babies to run grisly tests on.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=50382

To bad we won't "liberate" North Korea since they don't have any oil.

[celebritygooner]

Agusto Pinochet of Chile
General Suhuarto of Indonesia
Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam
King Fahd Bin Aziz of Saudi Arabia
Turgut Ozal of Turkey
Pol Pot of Cambodia

The list goes on and on...

Thank you, good list ... I don't know much about Suhuarto, and I disagree about your disapproval of King Fahd, but I generally accept our support to the rest in the context of the larger, idealogical struggle of the cold war. Should we be proud? No. Would Stalin have been worse? Yes. Defeating Communism was all that mattered, and you know what they say about laws and sausages ...

King Fahd was no worse a human rights abuser than any of his potential replacements (or any other Arab despot), and, as king of Saudi Arabia (thus de facto big brother of the entire Arab world) making nice with him made it easier to make nice with the entire region (thus, he was THE despot to hold hands with). Agree with that or not, everybody has to get in bed with somebody for their oil -- and so even if this is a black eye against the United States, Russia and China have ones to match, so it's not really points for or against.

And back to the original point ... what interest is China protecting by keeping North Korea in business? Everybody knows the DPRK is an abomination. If it were stronger, they would have gone on their campaign of triumph -- weaker, it would have collapsed. China keeps the country on puppet strings with just enough rice to keep it alive and with nuclear weapons to keep us out. The reason? A rich, democratic, United Korea on their border would not be helpful to the Chinese Communist party.

What interest was the United States protecting when Clinton went to Somalia and the Balkans and when Bush went to Afghanistan and Iraq? Have we derived any tangible benefits from any of these four campaigns? What interest was China protecting when they did none of the above, when they do nothing in Darfur, when they do nothingand when they keep guns pointed at Taiwan?
Is Cuba an eyesore? Absolutely, we should probably reevaluate our relationship with them. Every generation changes a country, so is Iran still an archenemy? Maybe ... but the situation doesn't hurt Cuba that much and it doesn't hurt Iran at all. Bottom line the United States and China are not moral equivelents. To argue otherwise is insane.

Psyko, dismissing my criticism of China as racist tripe is, essentially, supporting the counter-argument, that China and the United States are moral equivelents, and that Chinese support to North Korea is somehow excusable. Will you stand by either of those statements? Or will you say "oh nos!" and let your Call-Grant-A-Conservative-And-Make-A-Bill-O'Reilly-Joke reflex kick in?

Let's find out ...