North Korea blows up parts of inter-Korean road and rail links in a symbolic display of anger
The development comes as the rival Koreas are locked in rising animosities over North Korea’s claims that South Korea flew drones over Pyongyang.
You're viewing part of a thread.
I'm not sure why what it was in response to matters. If a drone over another country's land is an invasion, so are a bunch of balloons full of trash.
What's the difference?
What's the difference?
You don't see the difference between a drone and a balloon?
A drone is a weapon of war. A drone can collect surveillance, or even deliver a payload to a target.
But even if you want to consider a balloon an invasion, the South still invaded first when it aerial dropped propaganda.
A drone is a weapon of war. A drone can collect surveillance, or even deliver a payload to a target.
Sounds like balloons fit those descriptions to me...
Wait until this guy learns about South Korea having satellites. It does seem the only reason you would blow up your own roads and railways would be if you were worried about an immediate invasion though, otherwise why would you not just rig it up and blow it when needed? Could even use it as a defensive tactic.
First of all, I doubt that's the kind of balloon that was carrying trash.
Secondly, spy balloons were a thing back in the 1950s because satellites didn't exist yet. No one would use a balloon for warfare these days, because you can't steer a balloon.
What even is your point? If you think Washington was justified in freaking out over a weather balloon but Pyongyang was not justified in freaking out over frickin' drones, you're not making sense.
Ah, so these are (maybe, because you doubt it) not the right kind of balloons to count as an invasion.
This is quite the very narrow range of necessary characteristics for something that isn't doing any attacking to count as an invasion.
Especially when that drone didn't even drop any garbage. And, of course, you have no idea if that drone was doing any intel gathering or if it was armed.
As for what my point is, I'm just using your logic. A drone that doesn't do any attacking over North Korea is an invasion, therefore garbage balloons, which are doing more of an "attack" than that drone, are an invasion.
It seems to me this is more an issue of you liking North Korea and not liking South Korea.
I don’t care if garbage balloons count as an invasion or not. Even if they do count, South Korea still invaded first.
South Korea does not have control over its own military. The South Korean military is commanded and controlled by the United States, and North Korea is right to see that as a threat.
South Korea asked the United States to have operational control of their military back, and the United States said no.
South Korea is objectively a puppet and colony of the United States. If you do not have control of your own military, you are a puppet.
And I’m not surprised to see you defending the West’s puppet, as disgusting as that is.
It seems to me this is more an issue of you liking North Korea and not liking South Korea.
Every American owes an apology to North Korea for what America did to them.
There will be a reckoning one day. One day Americans will be taught about what they did, and it will weigh on the conscience of American schoolchildren, just like all the other American atrocities.
Ah, so now we've gone from "it's not an invasion" to "they did it first."
Also, this has nothing to do with America, so I'm not even sure why you're bringing it up. Is the U.S. the only country that matters in the world?
Ah, so now we've gone from "it's not an invasion" to "they did it first."
I said that several comments ago.
I said: "But even if you want to consider a balloon an invasion, the South still invaded first when it aerial dropped propaganda."
My first response to you was about how North Korea was acting in response to what South Korea did first.
And my first response to you is that both would be invasions by your own logic.
But let's also look at your "they did it first, therefore they are in the wrong" argument:
Hamas has been around since 1987 and has been firing rockets into Israel the entire time. Even if that doesn't count, based on an agreed criteria that a balloon that has the ability to be used as a weapon counts as an invasion, Hamas used incendiary balloons on Israel in 2018.
Therefore, based on your logic, Israel was in the right to invade Gaza, what with Gaza being under Hamas control at the time.
Do you believe Israel was in the right?
