On paper, that might sound viable to you. But it would pretty well result in NK attacking and lashing back out at anyone they could: SK, Japan, etc..
Chances are the theater threats were .. well, pure theater. But an actual military attack on Pyongang, hello WWIII, or at least the Korean War again.. And I'm sure the Chinese would just sit tight like good little dogs because the ol' USA told them to. The world is not that simple, do not let your emotions cloud your better judgment. K-Ju and crew (love that) will get their just desserts. I suspect we're going to hack back the fuck out of them.

Anyone else read KJU in their head as "K-Ju"? Its like J-Lo, or J-Law, or .. you get the idea. I kinda like it. I just hope his nudes aren't leaked as retribution.
.

You're really broadly generalizing though. Denying one controversial subject doesn't mean someone denies all science.
Skepticism is a healthy attribute, it indicates critical thinking, and an open mind.

I have no problem with evolution or Darwin whatsoever, believe solar power will be a fantastic resource when it matures, would like to eventually see an end to use of fossil fuels as soon as it becomes economically feasible to do so, am skeptical of religion (IMO religion is conveniently pre-packaged cereal box spirituality /philosophy at best); and think creationism is a fairy tale; but whereas AGW is concerned, I'm skeptical (but open minded) because of all the politics and hypocrisy that surrounds it. Al Gore and friends drone on and on about the dangers of carbon dioxide and man's apocalyptic effect on the planet, then all go fly their fuel-hog private personal jets to a summit to discuss it. Same is true of Gore's personal practices (i.e. his house), he seems very unconcerned in practice about those things which he champions in print or video. Such a strong proponent is expected to lead by example. The UN says AGW is critical to address, yet China hasn't had to abide by any accords, being probably the worst pollution offender currently on the planet.
Additionally, all climate and weather forecasts, whether next weekend or 100 years from now, despite the differences, are based on computer models, which are far from infallible. For these reasons, I'm still skeptical; however, I'm not unable to be swayed, given further evidence that isn't dressed up with carbon taxes and other political aspects; additionally, it sure would help if all the celebrities endorsing the tenant of AGW actually practiced what they preached.
Science is a process, a living, dynamic, self-correcting process. It must never be wielded as dogma.

I think the squirrel would disagree..

You're forgetting, there are 18,000 different theatres, it's not so easy, there's no magic to stop these kinds of things (if they're real, that is) as you imagine. Even the NSA, police, etc.. can't read minds, use a crystal ball, or have Superman's x-ray vision, even with all the data they collect.
But even if it is a ruse as we suspect, the hackers still hold tons of personal information about Sony's employees, their addresses, medical records, etc.. so possibly Sony is more concerned over abuse of that data, and is trying to appease NK.
Not that it matters, because appeasement never works. Never in the history of man has it worked, as an end to itself. Even war has a better track record of stopping aggression than appeasement. Unless the appeasement is used merely as a delay tactic, then it may have some strategic value there.

I thought they already did.

And home of the lawyers and their overly litigious legal system. If one single attack occurred, somebody would surely file suit against Sony, knowing this country. They're probably hedging their financial bets, even as silly as the whole thing is. Same reason we have idiot warning labels on stuff like Playdoh, saying not to shove the the whole can's contents up both nostrils or something.

and you just know this, how? Bottom line is, something like this that actually works (for a change) would be a cash cow. Like a real cure for baldness. Everyone ages. It's not like only a few selective people will want it. A bit like the undertaker business, you don't have to worry about running out of customers. Nearly everyone will want this, and the more affordable it is, the more people can and will buy it - economies of scale.

Yes, that's a great reason to adopt a child, to use him or her as a social experiment. That'll teach 'em humanity.

LOL.. - sorry, that's a pointless cliche, but I literally really did. I hadn't caught that when I first read the comment. Kinda made my day. What a difference the order of two words makes.

No, the thing is people are saying Sony has no right or grounds to sue or anything. But if employee medical records are released, those are pretty good grounds. I don't think they'll be able to do a whole lot now about the opinionated emails though.

Excellent point. Various cultures sometimes have unique concepts that another culture's language may not. And some concepts just seem better expressed by a certain language. For example, "je ne sais quoi" sums it up better than saying, "she has a certain something about her", IMO. There are additional intangible elements of expression there.

Who said anything about 'murican? Though I disagree with him if he advocates trashing other languages. I think some languages are fascinating and/or pleasant to hear: Gaelic, Brythonic, French, German, I even like Old English (Anglo Saxon) and Norse. Finiish and Russian are interesting. For some reason though, I don't like Spanish or Italian much, even though I like old Latin. I know, it makes little sense. But anyway, language is a part of culture, they can't be so readily separated.

No it's really not. Read number two again. That's not an absolute. Everything *should* be private unless it's the owning party wants it distributed, or , if the owning party does not want it public, but there is criminal content.
I have no right to distribute your personal email, unless you want me to, or there is something illegal in it. Corporations shouldn't be "a person" , BUT, they are made up of people who still retain some of their individual rights, and not all correspondence is necessarily strictly business related to the corporation. Would you be okay with it if your own email inbox/outbox where you work was hacked and released? ...assuming you work for a company.
The main point is, we can't advocate for privacy, and then immediately toss that principle in the trash the moment it's somebody we don't like.

" unless the owning party wishes it distributed or is under criminal investigation" .. those are conditions, not absolutes. Therefore, it's not a real dichotomy.
But you can't decide that when it's you, it's private; but when it's Amy Pascal or Scott Rudin personally disparaging Angelina Jolie (whether you agree or not), it's public.
Also, medical records of employees, not fair game.
Now, If verifiable revelations of law breaking come out, that's different. But just because it's a group of people working for a corporation doesn't mean they're not still people when you're looking at individual emails that express personal opinions, not company policies or actions.