Sociopath Community

they're looking for any reason not to do that. N Korea has one of the biggest armies in the world, and its closest ally (China) has nuclear weapons. any conflict could potentially kill millions of people. N Korea is also not significant in terms of geopolitical power, to the extent that say, Iraq is, so it's not in their interests to do that.

the american delusion. lol

https://kickass.so/the-interview-2014-web-dl-xvid-mp3-rarbg-t10001140.html

very cool 

they put it out on google play store and youtube

The extent of the dictatorship, brainwash and abuse in NK is ridiculous, and few people are even aware of how fucked up the shit going on in that country is. What happens with dictators like that is that they start deluding themselves that they are some sort of gods, and make mistakes because of it. It's why provoking them and tainting their precious image is a bit dangerous, but as long as it's within the confines of international law there's nothing wrong with it, on the contrary.

So yeah, no movie or book should be banned because of political reasons. NK will have to suck it up and endure the slap, doubt they will start ww3 over it. And no, there are better ways to spend Christmas Day that going to a movie, as far as I am concerned.

"From all that I only got 1 thing: Sony's taking a shot at North Korea. It's like Sony is attempting to force North Korea to acknowledge that Sony is still releasing the movie."
It seemed to me more like Sony was being pressured by two different sides playing a game of ping pong with Sony as the ball.

"Do you think movies like "The Interview" should even be allowed to be created (especially when it involves real world leaders names and to stretch it even farther, a movie about their assassination?)"
There's more movies than that one that have gone there. Seems like the censorship is extending to Team America as well.

"How do you think North Korea is gonna respond to this, or even if they already know, how do you think they're reacting right now?"
Don't care, they shouldn't have that sort of power beyond their own borders.

"Would you go see a movie on Christmas Day?"
I'm the type to wait for it to come on TV, Netflix, DVD, etc. Going to movies is only fun with other people, and that day seems like the least likely one for arranging such a thing.

"Do you think movies like "The Interview" should even be allowed to be created"

By not allowing the movie to be shown it's restricting and violating our freedom of speech. It goes against our constituition to not show the film. it's also set a precedent that outside forces can influence what we do.

"How do you think North Korea is gonna respond to this"

haha you're kidding right? They'll do nothing, our military is looking for a reason to storm Pyongyang. 

On a side note, I don't believe north Korea was responsible for the cyber attack. I believe it was China, North Korea lacks technology for even the most basic of needs. Their tech level is the equivalent to ours in the late 80's. China has done cyber attacks on the US before and is North Korea's biggest and only ally.

the argument is not 'US would not attack because they wouldn't win', it's more to do with the cost to benefit ratio.

N Korea - in terms of numbers- has one of the biggest militaries in the world. their capabilities may be lacking but i'm sure they could reach S Korea, which would lead to millions of casualties and basically destroy Seoul.

if the US did 'defeat' N Korea, they would be left dealing with a failed state with millions of deaths, a flood of refugees which would then cause problems for S Korea's economy, and the US would yet again be left responsible for rebuilding a failed state from the ground up, something they were unable to do in Iraq.

US doesn't seem to care too much about dictatorships, as demonstrated by their BFF's in Saudi Arabia amongst others, and their overthrowing of democracies if they are inhibiting US influence in that particular region - e.g. Venezuela's sanctions even though they were said to have the best electoral system in the world.

always serious unless i state otherwise.

"my point was that the US would not benefit from a conflict with N Korea. "

I never said the US would and never argued against that point. Why it's even being brought up is beyond me,

"you're just consistently trying to prove that the US fears no one and can do anything without repercussion. this isn't the case."

You're projecting words into my mouth. I only spoke of North Korea and China, two shit tier countries.

"you seem to be taking offense to the notion that the US isn't untouchable"

And you seem to have it all fucked up. I'm not advocating the concept of an invincible American war-machine. I'm stating the harmlessness of those two countries and how a war with them would be successful with minimal effort. The idea that North Korea or China has even the necessities to wage war on any country is laughable in the 1st place.

"your retorts to my comments about the US are to mock N Korea, which doesn't really help your case, nor does it insult my ego- i mean patriotism"

What the fuck are you talking about? Insulting egos and patriotism? It's nothing more than me trying to inform you that North Korea is on the verge of an economic and social collapse without the world's largest military at war with them.

"remember my point: the US would gain nothing from starting a conflict from N Korea, and thus they are not 'looking for a reason to storm pyongyang'."

So this is what has you spewing this bullshit backing North Korea? I assumed you would've realized I wasn't speaking for my entire country just the majority of our military. It's a common dream to go across to that seemingly "invincible" country and wipe the floor with them. 

I even specifically said "Our Military" before stating that. 

It's like you categorized and assumed what mindset I was in despite the facts and links i've put down. I may be in the US military but it doesn't mean I'm blind with bias. If you had any knowledge on how North Korea runs it's government and what drastic actions they have to take to keep their country from going bankrupt then you'd understand. 

You're trying to convince me that a 3rd world country has enough resources and assets to be a threat to the world's largest and highly funded Armed force. Your making zero sense.

X'D you're serious?

North Korea is laughably one of the worst militaries in the world, I wouldn't worry about nuclear missiles either haha. They tried launching an ICBM and it didnt even make it halfway to Japan. And then you're worried about china? LOL another one of the world's shittiest military forces. Militarily we outnumber them 15-1 in terms of tanks, helicopters, artillery, fighter jets, missiles, etc. Their dog shit training is laughable too, they just dump weapons into the hands of civilians and throw them on the front lines. It's not like either of them would have allies too, the entire world would see this as a chance to kill dictatorship.

Not to mention how poor North Korea's government actually is, the North Korean government kidnaps Chinese train crew members(who are sending them supplies in the first place) to ransom them off. And then again large-spread starvation is actually a problem over there. Any belief that North Korea is at all a threat is just the media over-hyping the situation as usual.

http://www.rantlifestyle.com/2014/01/16/reasons-north-korea-saddest-military-world/

http://theweek.com/article/index/264774/why-the-chinese-military-is-only-a-paper-dragon

the estimates for military personnel come from an independent source, not just what 'N Korea' tells you lol. and again, it's not about 'breaking the line'. my point was that the US would not benefit from a conflict with N Korea. you're just consistently trying to prove that the US fears no one and can do anything without repercussion. this isn't the case.

in reference to the idea of a conflict between N and S Korea, N Korea has ground to air missiles, ground to ground missiles, and whether or not they would 'win' over S Korea, the huge casualty/death toll would be economically devastating to S Korea (and N) which would bring no benefit to the US. they would most likely have to fund a massive rebuilding project which could cost trillions.

you seem to be taking offense to the notion that the US isn't untouchable, or that they may actively avoid conflict of any kind. your retorts to my comments about the US are to mock N Korea, which doesn't really help your case, nor does it insult my ego- i mean patriotism. your last paragraph is misinformed, as the words 'North Korea' do not actually appear in the sentence 'always serious unless i state otherwise'.

remember my point: the US would gain nothing from starting a conflict from N Korea, and thus they are not 'looking for a reason to storm pyongyang'.