or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › North Korea Attacks South Korea
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

North Korea Attacks South Korea - Page 2

post #41 of 125
South Korean defence minister resigns over deadly clash

Quote:
South Korea's defence minister has resigned amid criticism of his handling of North Korea's shelling of an island near their disputed maritime border.

無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #42 of 125
Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'

I posted this on another thread, however it is appropriate to post it here again.

Quote:
That's the question being debated after Sarah Palin said in an interview with Glenn Beck Wednesday that North Korea was a U.S. ally.

When asked by Beck how she would handle a situation like the one that was developing in North Korea, Palin responded: "This is stemming from, I think, a greater problem when we're all sitting around asking, 'Oh no, what are we going to do,' and we're not having a lot of faith that the White House is going to come out with a strong enough policy to sanction what it is that North Korea is going to do."

It is unclear whether Palin is talking about sanctions against North Korea, or U.S. sanctioning -- i.e. approving or supporting -- its actions.

Palin continued: "Obviously, we gotta stand with our North Korean allies," when Beck interrupted and corrected her to say "South Korea."

"And we're also bound by prudence to stand with our South Korean allies, yes," she responded.

Palin might have to "refudiate" what she meant.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #43 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Sarah Palin: 'We Gotta Stand With Our North Korean Allies'

I posted this on another thread, however it is appropriate to post it here again.



Palin might have to "refudiate" what she meant.

It's all part of the right-wing "strategery".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #44 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

It's all part of the right-wing "strategery".

As in Climategate...."refudiate" the science and insert misrepresentation, myth, and innuendos.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #45 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

As in Climategate...."refudiate" the science and insert misrepresentation, myth, and innuendos.

Yes, the AGW zealots do quite a bit of that. I'm glad you finally agree.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #46 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

It's all part of the right-wing "strategery".
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

As in Climategate...."refudiate" the science and insert misrepresentation, myth, and innuendos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Yes, the AGW zealots do quite a bit of that. I'm glad you finally agree.

As always the right-wing strategy is to take things of context, to refudiate the science and then to spin it their way. If you took the time to include my post in your response, it clearly reflects that my comments were directed to the right wingers and not to the scientist supporting AGW....but then again, not a surprise from you.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #47 of 125
With Limited Options, South Korea Shifts Military Rules
Quote:
SEOUL, South Korea Responding to growing public criticism after a deadly North Korean attack, President Lee Myung-bak accepted the resignation of his defense minister on Thursday and announced changes in the militarys rules of engagement to make it easier for South Korea to strike back with greater force, especially if civilians are threatened.

The government also announced plans to increase the number of troops and heavy weapons on Yeonpyeong Island, where two marines and two civilians died Tuesday in an artillery fusillade from the North. On Friday, President Lee appointed a security adviser, Lee Hee-won, as the new defense minister.

But Mr. Lee, who came to office two years ago vowing to get tough with the North, has little maneuvering room in formulating a response. While the attack appears to have pushed anti-North Korean sentiment here to its highest level in years, there is little public support for taking military action against the North that might lead to an escalation of hostilities.

UPDATE:

N Korea warns war drills take region to 'brink of war'

Quote:
North Korea has warned that impending joint military exercises by the South and the US are pushing the region to "the brink of war".

A group of naval ships, led by a nuclear-powered US aircraft carrier, is heading to the Yellow Sea to take part in the drills, due to begin on Sunday.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #48 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Sarcasm or no he was editorializing. Bringing in a seperate subject ( his hate for all things left ) when it was unnecessary.

And SDW as far as I'm concerned you've aready discussed your take on the political dimension.

I have not discussed my take on the political dimension on this incident. Not at all. I have no brought politics into this issue at all. Try reading the thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

I imagine you know that the post I entered is pretty much factually correct,

Actually, I think it's insane.

Quote:
and the reason you answered me in that way was because you know it is true, but you are in denial; you seem to be unable to handle the notion that the good old US of A has done its fair share of evil in its brief history (courtesy not of its people, but its élites), in addition to the huge amount of amazingly positive output on behalf of humanity, (by its people, that is, not its elites).

I am not at all in denial of the fact that the US has done wrong in the past. However, you posted this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo
Unless the country is the US, which tends to attack other nations for reasons which (a) are hard to pin down, (b) turn out to be lies or (c) make a show of wielding power to the rest of the world, or (d) for the benefit of big business, acts of war like this usually conducted in anger; retaliation for some other act of aggression. In this case, we shall probably never know how this spat got started; in the last significant incident when a S. Korean ship was torpedoed, allegedly by NK, it turned out that the torpedo was of German manufacture. Arms trade has no barriers, huh?

Maybe this latest attack is Krazy Kim showing off to the world that he's got a big dick? Or perhaps he's taken a leaf out of the neoconservative doctrine, as championed by the George W. Bush Administration, which has demonstrated that it's perfectly OK to attack others, just because we can.

Yeah sammi, we attack others "just because we can." That is garbage.

Quote:


Every nation has their clutch of those who believe in their own "exceptionalism", but we are all of the (fatally flawed) human race, and thus every nation is subject to carrying out deeds that ranger from the wonderful to the dastardly. NK happens to be currently run by a government that veers towards the dastardly, but that does not mean that the long-suffering North Korean people deserve to be put under heavy manners from the rest of the world, in the way that the neoconservative clique in DC (privately) wish that all Arabs and Muslims should be at best, branded as terrorists, or worst, exterminated.

C'mon SDW, get a cluestick.


Yes, let's just label their totalitarian, murderous government of thugs "veering towards dastardly," all at the same time implying that it's morally equivalent to the US and our allies. I would expect nothing less from you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post


Sorry for ruining your " Joke " but it was ill timed and in bad taste.

Actually, considering that his observation was completely accurate and in a thread about the issue, it was perfectly timed and in excellent taste.

Quote:
This is a serious issue and you wandered all over the map with your take on left wing political power. Not even a perticularly [sic] good joke at that. It's the truth as you see it. Not everybody or even most see this your way.

/QUOTE]

You're saying that the Left didn't go bonkers over Bush's handling of North Korea. You're saying that if Bush undertook some of the same actions Obama has, the Left wouldn't have been excoriating him? If that's true, you're kidding yourself.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #49 of 125
Well as usual the right is discussing reality and the left is discussing.... the right.

I don't like your jokes.
I'm offended that you're not offended.
Everyone is evil but me and my good intentions.

What a load of bullcrap!!

In the meantime Pat Buchanan asks the appropriate (and thus by leftist reasoning, racist) question. Why are we still in Korea?

Unlike 1950, South Korea is not an impoverished ex-colony of Japan. She is the largest of all the "Asian tigers," a nation with twice the population and 40 times the economy of the North.

Great point!

Why, then, are we still in South Korea? Why is this quarrel our quarrel? Why is this war, should it come, America's war?

This question isn't only important when we have a Republican president and want to elect some Democrats.

Why cannot Japan defend herself? Why does this remain our responsibility, 65 years after MacArthur took the surrender in Tokyo Bay?

Why, when the Cold War has been over for 20 years, do all these Cold War alliances still exist?

Finally he hits on and notes the most important point of all.....

We borrow from Europe to defend Europe. We borrow from Japan and China to defend Japan from China. We borrow from the Gulf Arabs to defend the Gulf Arabs.

We need to take a different approach and stop being the cop for the world. We need to be strong enough to stand up to anyone who dares scream that being unwilling to police the world is racist as this is what both neocons and old liberals fall back on when they want to stop discussion of such questions.

The concerns of those who want to argue about insensitive jokes, intentions, being offended, they can go kiss my butt. America can no longer afford to keep paying for their heightened sense of being continually offended.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #50 of 125
China works to ease North-South Korea tension
Quote:
China's Foreign Ministry has begun working to ease tensions on the Korean peninsula, holding a series of talks with Washington, Seoul and Pyongyang......

The US and other powers have repeatedly urged Beijing - Pyongyang's only ally - to use its influence to defuse the crisis.

On Friday, China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi met the North's ambassador in person, and spoke on the phone to his US and South Korean counterparts, according to a statement carried by the state-run Xinhua news agency.

Why this time might be different
Quote:
Still, Klingner says he expects China to respond as it has in the past: by looking to defuse the problem rather than solving it. But some factors suggest China could be coaxed to play a more constructive role after this incident, others say.

For one thing, Chinese President Hu Jintao is set to visit Washington in January, and the Chinese very much want a successful summit, says CSISs Glaser.

But the brazenness of the attack on Yeonpyeong island and the absence of any doubt about who carried it out could also prompt the Chinese to take a tougher approach this time.

Glaser notes that Obama was openly frustrated with Chinas response to the torpedo sinking in March of the South Korean Navy vessel the Cheonan. China never did agree to explicit international condemnation (through the United Nations Security Council) of North Korea for that attack.

But were in a better position to get a condemnation from the Chinese this time, she says, because there simply is no possibility of deniability.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #51 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yeah sammi, we attack others "just because we can." That is garbage.

When powers become superpowers, with nobody to police their actions, they do what they want. Look at Wall Street... its the same syndrome.


Quote:
Yes, let's just label their totalitarian, murderous government of thugs "veering towards dastardly," all at the same time implying that it's morally equivalent to the US and our allies. I would expect nothing less from you.

Tell that to the civilian populations the following nations, all of which have been attacked in some variety of military operation, from "police actions" to a full scale invasion and lengthy occupation by the US within the last 100 years, none of which can be seen to be protecting the US Constitution, its borders and its people..... in other words, US national security.

ARGENTINA\t1890\tTroops\tBuenos Aires interests protected.
CHILE\t1891\tTroops\tMarines clash with nationalist rebels.
HAITI\t1891\tTroops\tBlack revolt on Navassa defeated.
NICARAGUA\t1894\tTroops\tMonth-long occupation of Bluefields.
CHINA\t1894-95\tNaval, troops\tMarines land in Sino-Japanese War
KOREA\t1894-96\tTroops\tMarines kept in Seoul during war.
PANAMA\t1895\tTroops, naval\tMarines land in Colombian province.
NICARAGUA\t1896\tTroops\tMarines land in port of Corinto.
CHINA\t1898-1900\tTroops\tBoxer Rebellion fought by foreign armies.
PHILIPPINES\t1898-1910 (-?)\tNaval, troops\tSeized from Spain, killed 600,000 Filipinos
CUBA\t1898-1902 (-?)\tNaval, troops\tSeized from Spain, still hold Navy base.
PUERTO RICO\t1898 (-?)\tNaval, troops\tSeized from Spain, occupation continues.
GUAM\t1898 (-?)\tNaval, troops\tSeized from Spain, still use as base.
MINNESOTA\t1898 (-?)\tTroops\tArmy battles Chippewa at Leech Lake.
NICARAGUA\t1898\tTroops\tMarines land at port of San Juan del Sur.
SAMOA\t1899 (-?)\tTroops\tBattle over succession to throne.
NICARAGUA\t1899\tTroops\tMarines land at port of Bluefields.
PANAMA\t1901-14\tNaval, troops\tBroke off from Colombia 1903, annexed Canal Zone 1914.
HONDURAS\t1903\tTroops\tMarines intervene in revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC\t1903-04\tTroops\tU.S. interests protected in Revolution.
KOREA\t1904-05\tTroops\tMarines land in Russo-Japanese War.
CUBA\t1906-09\tTroops\tMarines land in democratic election.
NICARAGUA\t1907\tTroops\t"Dollar Diplomacy" protectorate set up.
HONDURAS\t1907\tTroops\tMarines land during war with Nicaragua
PANAMA\t1908\tTroops\tMarines intervene in election contest.
NICARAGUA\t1910\tTroops\tMarines land in Bluefields and Corinto.
HONDURAS\t1911\tTroops\tU.S. interests protected in civil war.
CHINA\t1911-41\tNaval, troops \tContinuous occupation with flare-ups.
CUBA\t1912\tTroops\tU.S. interests protected in civil war.
PANAMA\t1912\tTroops\tMarines land during heated election.
HONDURAS\t1912\tTroops\tMarines protect U.S. economic interests.
NICARAGUA\t1912-33\tTroops, bombing\t10-year occupation, fought guerillas
MEXICO\t1913\tNaval\tAmericans evacuated during revolution.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC\t1914\tNaval\tFight with rebels over Santo Domingo.
COLORADO\t1914\tTroops\tBreaking of miners' strike by Army.
MEXICO\t1914-18\tNaval, troops\tSeries of interventions against nationalists.
HAITI\t1914-34\tTroops, bombing\t19-year occupation after revolts.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC\t1916-24\tTroops\t8-year Marine occupation.
CUBA\t1917-33\tTroops\tMilitary occupation, economic protectorate.
RUSSIA\t1918-22\tNaval, troops\tFive landings to fight Bolsheviks
PANAMA\t1918-20\tTroops\t"Police duty" during unrest after elections.
HONDURAS\t1919\tTroops\tMarines land during election campaign.
YUGOSLAVIA\t1919\tTroops/Marines\tintervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia.
GUATEMALA\t1920\tTroops\t2-week intervention against unionists.
WEST VIRGINIA\t1920-21\tTroops, bombing\tArmy intervenes against mineworkers.
TURKEY\t1922\tTroops\tFought nationalists in Smyrna.
CHINA\t1922-27\tNaval, troops\tDeployment during nationalist revolt.
HONDURAS\t1924-25\tTroops\tLanded twice during election strife.
PANAMA\t1925\tTroops\tMarines suppress general strike.
CHINA\t1927-34\tTroops\tMarines stationed throughout the country.
EL SALVADOR\t1932\tNaval\tWarships send during Marti revolt.
DETROIT\t1943\tTroops\tArmy put down Black rebellion.
YUGOSLAVIA\t1946\tNuclear threat, naval\tResponse to shoot-down of US plane.
URUGUAY\t1947\tNuclear threat\tBombers deployed as show of strength.
GREECE\t1947-49\tCommando operation\tU.S. directs extreme-right in civil war.
GERMANY\t1948\tNuclear Threat\tAtomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift.
PHILIPPINES\t1948-54\tCommando operation\tCIA directs war against Huk Rebellion.
PUERTO RICO\t1950\tCommando operation\tIndependence rebellion crushed in Ponce.
KOREA\t1951-53 (-?)\tTroops, naval, bombing , nuclear threats\tU.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases.
IRAN\t1953\tCommando Operation\tCIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah.
VIETNAM\t1954\tNuclear threat\tFrench offered bombs to use against seige.
GUATEMALA\t1954\tCommando operation, bombing, nuclear threat\tCIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.
EGYPT\t1956\tNuclear threat, troops\tSoviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners.
LEBANON\tl958\tTroops, naval\tMarine occupation against rebels.
IRAQ\t1958\tNuclear threat\tIraq warned against invading Kuwait.
CHINA\tl958\tNuclear threat\tChina told not to move on Taiwan isles.
PANAMA\t1958\tTroops\tFlag protests erupt into confrontation.
VIETNAM\tl960-75\tTroops, naval, bombing, nuclear threats\tFought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.
CUBA\tl961\tCommando operation\tCIA-directed exile invasion fails.
GERMANY\tl961\tNuclear threat\tAlert during Berlin Wall crisis.
LAOS\t1962\tCommando operation\tMilitary buildup during guerrilla war.
CUBA\t l962\t Nuclear threat, naval\tBlockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union.
IRAQ\t1963\tCommando operation\tCIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service.
PANAMA\tl964\tTroops\tPanamanians shot for urging canal's return.
INDONESIA\tl965\tCommand operation\tMillion killed in CIA-assisted army coup.
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC\t1965-66\tTroops, bombing\tMarines land during election campaign.
GUATEMALA\tl966-67\tCommando operation\tGreen Berets intervene against rebels.
DETROIT\tl967\tTroops\tArmy battles African Americans, 43 killed.
UNITED STATES\tl968\tTroops\tAfter King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities.
CAMBODIA\tl969-75\tBombing, troops, naval\tUp to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos.
OMAN\tl970\tCommando operation\tU.S. directs Iranian marine invasion.
LAOS\tl971-73\tCommando operation, bombing\tU.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.
SOUTH DAKOTA\tl973\tCommando operation\tArmy directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas.
MIDEAST\t1973\tNuclear threat\tWorld-wide alert during Mideast War.
CHILE\t1973\tCommando operation\tCIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president.
CAMBODIA\tl975\tTroops, bombing\tGas captured ship, 28 die in copter crash.
ANGOLA\tl976-92\tCommando operation\tCIA assists South African-backed rebels.
IRAN\tl980\tTroops, nuclear threat, aborted bombing\tRaid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.
LIBYA\tl981\tNaval jets\tTwo Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.
EL SALVADOR\tl981-92\tCommando operation, troops\tAdvisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash.
NICARAGUA\tl981-90\tCommando operation, naval\tCIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.
LEBANON\tl982-84\tNaval, bombing, troops\tMarines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions.
GRENADA\tl983-84\tTroops, bombing\tInvasion four years after revolution.
HONDURAS\tl983-89\tTroops\tManeuvers help build bases near borders.
IRAN\tl984\tJets\tTwo Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf.
LIBYA\tl986\tBombing, naval\tAir strikes to topple nationalist gov't.
BOLIVIA\t1986\tTroops\tArmy assists raids on cocaine region.
IRAN\tl987-88\tNaval, bombing\tUS intervenes on side of Iraq in war.
LIBYA\t1989\tNaval jets\tTwo Libyan jets shot down.
VIRGIN ISLANDS\t1989\tTroops\tSt. Croix Black unrest after storm.
PHILIPPINES\t1989\tJets\tAir cover provided for government against coup.
PANAMA\t1989 (-?)\tTroops, bombing\tNationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed.
LIBERIA\t1990\tTroops\tForeigners evacuated during civil war.
SAUDI ARABIA\t1990-91\tTroops, jets\tIraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.
IRAQ\t1990-91\tBombing, troops, naval\tBlockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
KUWAIT\t1991\tNaval, bombing, troops\tKuwait royal family returned to throne.
IRAQ\t1991-2003\tBombing, naval\tNo-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south; constant air strikes and naval-enforced economic sanctions
SOMALIA\t1992-94\tTroops, naval, bombing\tU.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction.
YUGOSLAVIA\t1992-94\tNaval\tNATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro.
BOSNIA\t1993-?\tJets, bombing\tNo-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs.
HAITI\t1994\tTroops, naval\tBlockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to office three years after coup.
ZAIRE (CONGO)\t1996-97\tTroops\tMarines at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo revolution begins.
LIBERIA\t1997\tTroops\tSoldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
ALBANIA\t1997\tTroops\tSoldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
SUDAN\t1998\tMissiles\tAttack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to be "terrorist" nerve gas plant.
AFGHANISTAN\t1998\tMissiles\tAttack on former CIA training camps used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies.
IRAQ\t1998\tBombing, Missiles\tFour days of intensive air strikes after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions.
YUGOSLAVIA\t1999\tBombing, Missiles\tHeavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo.
YEMEN\t2000\tNaval\tUSS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed.
MACEDONIA\t2001\tTroops\tNATO forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels.
UNITED STATES\t2001\tJets, naval\tReaction to hijacker attacks on New York, DC
AFGHANISTAN\t2001-?\tTroops, bombing, missiles\tMassive U.S. mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. More than 30,000 U.S. troops and numerous private security contractors carry our occupation.
YEMEN\t2002\tMissiles\tPredator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda, including a US citizen.
PHILIPPINES\t2002-?\tTroops, naval\tTraining mission for Philippine military fighting Abu Sayyaf rebels evolves into combat missions in Sulu Archipelago, west of Mindanao.
COLOMBIA\t2003-?\tTroops\tUS special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting oil pipeline.
IRAQ\t2003-?\tTroops, naval, bombing, missiles\tSaddam regime toppled in Baghdad. More than 250,000 U.S. personnel participate in invasion. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi'ite insurgencies. More than 160,000 troops and numerous private contractors carry out occupation and build large permanent bases.
LIBERIA\t2003\tTroops\tBrief involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader.
HAITI\t2004-05\tTroops, naval \tMarines land after right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to leave by Washington.
PAKISTAN\t2005-?\tMissiles, bombing, covert operation\tCIA missile and air strikes and Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda and Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians. Drone attacks also on Pakistani Mehsud network.
SOMALIA\t2006-?\tMissiles, naval, covert operation\tSpecial Forces advise Ethiopian invasion that topples Islamist government; AC-130 strikes and Cruise missile attacks against Islamist rebels; naval blockade against "pirates" and insurgents.
SYRIA\t2008\tTroops\tSpecial Forces in helicopter raid 5 miles from Iraq kill 8 Syrian civilians
YEMEN.........

Oh, and I forgot Tibet. The US sided with COMMUNIST China in the 1950s when Chinese troops invaded and occupied that nation, virtually wiping out a civilization that has been in existence some 15 times longer than the United States has been a nation..... just because they could.

The total civilian death toll from these military actions is incalculable, probably many millions.

And thats not including sanctions.

We're the 'nice guys' huh?

Give us a break.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #52 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

When powers become superpowers, with nobody to police their actions, they do what they want. Look at Wall Street... its the same syndrome.




Tell that to the civilian populations the following nations, all of which have been attacked in some variety of military operation, from "police actions" to a full scale invasion and lengthy occupation by the US within the last 100 years, none of which can be seen to be protecting the US Constitution, its borders and its people..... in other words, US national security.
We're the 'nice guys' huh?

...

Give us a break.


I realize that you're attempting to impress with that with that bloated post-bomb of a list. It's really a worthless argument to get into, because you're employing a strawman tactic. I've not argued that US actions have been justifiable in every conflict. Yet, you continue to argue as if that's my position. I've also argued that we have "stuck our noses" where they don't belong at times, yet you continue to argue as if I haven't. It's as if you don't care or don't want to know who the other party is when you discuss and/or argue. You just keep beating the drum to a steady, numbing rhythm.

All the while, you forget you're conversing with a true conservative, one who in many cases shares some of your views. I'm a person that believes that CIA and other national security apparatus have fucked up numerous times. I'm a person that knows there are places we never should have gotten involved. But you ignore that, instead posting that ridiculous list, much of which contains things like this:

Quote:
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC\t1903-04\tTroops\tU.S. interests protected in Revolution.

Hmm...US interests protected.

Quote:
LIBYA\tl986\tBombing, naval\tAir strikes to topple nationalist gov't.

Alternate reason: Punishment for government sponsored terrorism, specifically bombing of discotech.

Quote:
SAUDI ARABIA\t1990-91\tTroops, jets\tIraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.
IRAQ\t1990-91\tBombing, troops, naval\tBlockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
KUWAIT\t1991\tNaval, bombing, troops\tKuwait royal family returned to throne.

Three entries for essentially one operation, all provoked by Iraq.

Quote:
IRAQ\t1991-2003\tBombing, naval\tNo-fly zone over Kurdish north, Shiite south; constant air strikes and naval-enforced economic sanctions



INTERNATIONALLY enforced no-fly zone, violated by Iraq every day for 12 years.

All you have there is a list of military operations. Some are justifiable, some are probably not. Yet you present it as proof positive of injustices committed by the US. The fact of the matter is that you are against any and all military operations undertaken by this country. At the same time, you justify, excuse and sometimes openly support the military operations of others, many of which happen to be brutal dictatorships with horrendous human rights records.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #53 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I realize that you're attempting to impress with that with that bloated post-bomb of a list. It's really a worthless argument to get into, because you're employing a strawman tactic. I've not argued that US actions have been justifiable in every conflict. Yet, you continue to argue as if that's my position. I've also argued that we have "stuck our noses" where they don't belong at times, yet you continue to argue as if I haven't. It's as if you don't care or don't want to know who the other party is when you discuss and/or argue. You just keep beating the drum to a steady, numbing rhythm.

All the while, you forget you're conversing with a true conservative, one who in many cases shares some of your views. I'm a person that believes that CIA and other national security apparatus have fucked up numerous times. I'm a person that knows there are places we never should have gotten involved. But you ignore that, instead posting that ridiculous list, much of which contains things like this:



Hmm...US interests protected.



Alternate reason: Punishment for government sponsored terrorism, specifically bombing of discotech.



Three entries for essentially one operation, all provoked by Iraq.





INTERNATIONALLY enforced no-fly zone, violated by Iraq every day for 12 years.

All you have there is a list of military operations. Some are justifiable, some are probably not. Yet you present it as proof positive of injustices committed by the US. The fact of the matter is that you are against any and all military operations undertaken by this country. At the same time, you justify, excuse and sometimes openly support the military operations of others, many of which happen to be brutal dictatorships with horrendous human rights records.

Quote:
INTERNATIONALLY enforced no-fly zone, violated by Iraq every day for 12 years.

Which could have and should have been handled in another fashion than presenting false evidence that Iraq had WMD at the time to support an unnecessary invasion.

There are so many reasons this action was wrong I could write a book ( although I'm sure someone already has ).
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #54 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Well as usual the right is discussing reality and the left is discussing.... the right.

I don't like your jokes.
I'm offended that you're not offended.
Everyone is evil but me and my good intentions.

What a load of bullcrap!!

In the meantime Pat Buchanan asks the appropriate (and thus by leftist reasoning, racist) question. Why are we still in Korea?

Unlike 1950, South Korea is not an impoverished ex-colony of Japan. She is the largest of all the "Asian tigers," a nation with twice the population and 40 times the economy of the North.

Great point!

Why, then, are we still in South Korea? Why is this quarrel our quarrel? Why is this war, should it come, America's war?

This question isn't only important when we have a Republican president and want to elect some Democrats.

Why cannot Japan defend herself? Why does this remain our responsibility, 65 years after MacArthur took the surrender in Tokyo Bay?

Why, when the Cold War has been over for 20 years, do all these Cold War alliances still exist?

Finally he hits on and notes the most important point of all.....

We borrow from Europe to defend Europe. We borrow from Japan and China to defend Japan from China. We borrow from the Gulf Arabs to defend the Gulf Arabs.

We need to take a different approach and stop being the cop for the world. We need to be strong enough to stand up to anyone who dares scream that being unwilling to police the world is racist as this is what both neocons and old liberals fall back on when they want to stop discussion of such questions.

The concerns of those who want to argue about insensitive jokes, intentions, being offended, they can go kiss my butt. America can no longer afford to keep paying for their heightened sense of being continually offended.

Quote:
Well as usual the right is discussing reality and the left is discussing.... the right.

Uh yeah.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #55 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Which could have and should have been handled in another fashion than presenting false evidence that Iraq had WMD at the time to support an unnecessary invasion.

There are so many reasons this action was wrong I could write a book ( although I'm sure someone already has ).

jimmac, I want you to read this next part carefully:

I'm getting very concerned about you. Have you been checked for Alzheimer's or Pre-Senile Dementia? I'm only asking because your ability to miss the point entirely seems to be growing recently. Presenting evidence of WMD has nothing to do with the the No Fly Zone. On Sammi's list, this was presented as an example of US Military activity. We weren't discussing the invasion(s) of Iraq.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #56 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Uh yeah.

What the fuck? THAT is your response to what trump posted? That's it...I'm convinced. You don't care what trump or I post. All you do is see by whom the post is authored, and post a string of smilies such as or or

Welcome back to the ignore list. Effective 3:26 PM on 11/27.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #57 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

What the fuck? THAT is your response to what trump posted? That's it...I'm convinced. You don't care what trump or I post. All you do is see by whom the post is authored, and post a string of smilies such as or or

Welcome back to the ignore list. Effective 3:26 PM on 11/27.

It had as much content as some of your posts.

SDW I do care. Deeply.


Quote:
Welcome back to the ignore list.

Oh good!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #58 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

When powers become superpowers, with nobody to police their actions, they do what they want.......

I don't think that Japan and the ROK are complaining. China is taking more diplomatic actions than they have in the past to resolve the issues with NK. Sometimes a boat in "China's Pond" will stir up some action.Obama uses gunboat diplomacy with North Korea -- and China

The US is winding down their military presence in ROK, by the end of 2012 there will only be a small presence. Most of ROK'd forces will be under their own command.

Upgrading the South Korea-U.S. alliance
Quote:
There seems to be no turning back on the handover process, however; it will be completed by 2012 as scheduled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Tell that to the civilian populations the following nations, all of which have been attacked in some variety of military operation, from "police actions" to a full scale invasion and lengthy occupation by the US within the last 100 years, none of which can be seen to be protecting the US Constitution, its borders and its people..... in other words, US national security.

ARGENTINA\t.......
YEMEN.........

Your list from Timeline of United States military operations seemed edited. Some of the reasons cited for some of the actions were to send small contingents of marines to protect US citizens and US Embassy personnel during times of civil strife, wars not involving the US and revolutions. These acts seem reasonable to protect your citizens.

Deployments during both WW's weren't listed. The US unofficially sanctioned sending troops to China to combat the Japanese (Flying Tigers). Also there was an unofficial American pilot contingent in the RAF during the battle of Britain.....not to mention lend lease and sending convoys of supplies to GB and Russia before Pearl Harbor (I know it violated the neutrality act).

Philippines, Corregidor and the Bataan death march shouldn't be forgotten.

You can't categorize all actions that the US has taken in its history as" we do it because we can mentality"....sometimes we have to because there no one else willing to step up.

Only wish we stepped up in Kosovo and Bosnia before the genocide and ethnic cleansing. Wonder where was NATO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Oh, and I forgot Tibet. The US sided with COMMUNIST China in the 1950s when Chinese troops invaded and occupied that nation, virtually wiping out a civilization that has been in existence some 15 times longer than the United States has been a nation..... just because they could.

I'll let you google the sources, but I found that the US, prior to WWII considered Tibet part of China. China had claimed that Tibet was part of its territory since the signing of a treaty. However, the US was dealing with Tibet without China's knowledge during WWII. After the war and when the Communist came into power, the US supported Tibet, however as with the rest of the world, it stood by as the PRCA marched into Tibet....I wonder if the US did get involved and supported Tibet whether you would consider it yet another act of US doing what it wants to do because it can.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #59 of 125
US and South Korea begin military exercises

Quote:
South Korea and the United States have begun four days of joint military exercises in the waters off the Korean west coast.
The drills are taking place about 125km (77 miles) south of the disputed maritime border between the two Koreas, about 40km off the Korean coast.
The aircraft carrier is likely to be stationed further south in international waters, but still technically within striking range of Chinese cities.
A statement from North Korea's official KCNA news agency said: "If the US brings its carrier to the West Sea of Korea (Yellow Sea), no-one can predict the ensuing consequences."

North Korea warning over South Korea-US military drill

Quote:
North Korea has vowed to hit back if its waters are violated during joint US-South Korean military exercises, the North's state-run news agency reports.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #60 of 125
Thread Starter 

I wouldn't be surprised if CHINA was the nation who put NK back in its box militarily. That would be a wake-up call to the world. Imagine how good China would look...launching a surprise attack in defense of the South as opposed to its ally, the North....all with a US carrier battle group in the vicinity.

OK, I would be surprised. But it's an interesting thought.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #61 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101123...20101123092327



Very concerning. This would seem to be more than a "skirmish." Then again, the response from the US, China and the South itself seems to indicate the primary focus in lack of escalation. My question is...how many times is this going to happen before it triggers a full-scale war? One has to wonder about China's role as well. While they are regarded as the North's only real ally, I can't imagine they would tolerate an invasion of the South. Perhaps that is the only thing stopping it from happening.

Let us hope that Obama does not get us into another war with North Korea. we are fighting 2 wars already.I do not trust China at all!This a serious problem now.
post #62 of 125
The transfer of power may be the best chance to end north korea. Never let a crisis go to waste.
post #63 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I wouldn't be surprised if CHINA was the nation who put NK back in its box militarily. That would be a wake-up call to the world. Imagine how good China would look...launching a surprise attack in defense of the South as opposed to its ally, the North....all with a US carrier battle group in the vicinity.

OK, I would be surprised. But it's an interesting thought.

China call for urgent Korea talks
Quote:
China has called for an emergency meeting of key nations amid tension in Korea over the North's deadly shelling of a Southern island.
It proposed that members of the six nations that have been taking part in talks on North Korean nuclear disarmament should meet in December.
The two Koreas, the US, China, Japan and Russia are involved in the talks.

It's been a long time since China has made the effort to engage in talks over NK. The last time the US dispatched the GW to Korea was after the sinking of the ROK naval ship, the CHEONAN. The Chinese threatened the US not to send the GW into the Yellow Sea, to the west of Korea. China Bristles at Prospect of U.S. Aircraft Carrier in the Yellow Sea which caused the US and SK naval forces to keep to the east of it.
China has been reluctant to rein in NK even over the nuclear development issue. North Korean Refugees in China has also been another issue between NK and China
For some takes on the situation from China's bloggers show different views.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #64 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerald apple View Post

Let us hope that Obama does not get us into another war with North Korea. we are fighting 2 wars already.I do not trust China at all!This a serious problem now.

If you are not familiar with the relationship between NK and SK, this is yet another incident. SK (ROK) does not want a war and will do what it takes, short of surrender to ensure that there is no break out in hostilities. As I mentioned in the post above, the ROK did not go to war over the sinking of the Cheonan. By military alliance agreements, the US has control over the forces in the ROK.

China feeling pressure over the US sending the GW into the Yellow Sea will probably put more pressure on NK to back off. If you have read some of the Chinese blog site in my previous post, it appears that the Chinese, at lease those who blog feel that NK is a problem.

The long term issue is dealing with the Kim Dynasty in NK and have them dismantle their nuclear weapons program. China needs to step up, they are the only "friend" that NK has.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #65 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

The transfer of power may be the best chance to end north korea. Never let a crisis go to waste.

The big question is the unknown. Kim Jong Un is unknown to the outside world, including China. We don't know if there will battle for power in NK after the "Glorious Leader KJI dies. Even if KJU has been designated as the heir apparent, he still has an older brothers to contend with. There may also be Generals within the Government that want to take control. Korea has not had a dynasty since the ending of the Joseon Dynasty; but of course the Kim Dynasty power is limited to NK.

McCain: Time to discuss `regime change' in NKorea
Quote:
WASHINGTON Sen. John McCain said Sunday it was time to discuss "regime change" in North Korea, but the former Navy combat pilot didn't say how he advocates changing the government in the repressive and secretive dictatorship.....
"The key to this, obviously, is China," McCain said on "State of the Union" on CNN. "And, unfortunately, China is not behaving as a responsible world power. It cannot be in China's long-term interest to see a renewed conflict on the Korean peninsula."
The Arizona Republican added: "They could bring the North Korean economy to its knees if they wanted to. And I cannot believe that the Chinese should, in a mature fashion, not find it in their interest to restrain North Korea. So far, they are not."
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #66 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

jimmac, I want you to read this next part carefully:

I'm getting very concerned about you. Have you been checked for Alzheimer's or Pre-Senile Dementia? I'm only asking because your ability to miss the point entirely seems to be growing recently. Presenting evidence of WMD has nothing to do with the the No Fly Zone. On Sammi's list, this was presented as an example of US Military activity. We weren't discussing the invasion(s) of Iraq.

Nice try at an Ad-Hom.

Quote:
Presenting evidence of WMD has nothing to do with the the No Fly Zone. On Sammi's list, this was presented as an example of US Military activity. We weren't discussing the invasion(s) of Iraq.

This was sammi jo presenting U. S. military actions in a negative light and so you tried to defend them. One was the no fly zone in Iraq which as we all know you've harped on several times in the past as a justification for invasion. I just decided to couinter that old falsehood before you started up again.

Here's your justification :
Quote:
INTERNATIONALLY enforced no-fly zone, violated by Iraq every day for 12 years.

The list that sammi jo was presenting was about this :

Quote:
Quote by SDW:
Yes, let's just label their totalitarian, murderous government of thugs "veering towards dastardly," all at the same time implying that it's morally equivalent to the US and our allies. I would expect nothing less from you.

And then sammi jo's reply to you :

Tell that to the civilian populations the following nations, all of which have been attacked in some variety of military operation, from "police actions" to a full scale invasion and lengthy occupation by the US within the last 100 years, none of which can be seen to be protecting the US Constitution, its borders and its people..... in other words, US national security.

I just picked one out of the list because you tried to justify it and it's one we've been over a million times in the past. And as I've told you before everytime you do try that I'll counter it.

Anything else where you want to call my mental health into question?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #67 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

If you are not familiar with the relationship between NK and SK, this is yet another incident. SK (ROK) does not want a war and will do what it takes, short of surrender to ensure that there is no break out in hostilities. As I mentioned in the post above, the ROK did not go to war over the sinking of the Cheonan. By military alliance agreements, the US has control over the forces in the ROK.

China feeling pressure over the US sending the GW into the Yellow Sea will probably put more pressure on NK to back off. If you have read some of the Chinese blog site in my previous post, it appears that the Chinese, at lease those who blog feel that NK is a problem.

The long term issue is dealing with the Kim Dynasty in NK and have them dismantle their nuclear weapons program. China needs to step up, they are the only "friend" that NK has.


I agree with your assessment. As much of a rising power as the Chinese are, they are still not well equipped enough feel confident in the face of a carrier battle group or two. For one thing, they always get their back hair up when we get close to "their" waters.

As for NK: I just wonder when the day comes that they go a step too far. They've already attacked a SK ship and shelled an island on top of all their other antics. I wonder how many South Koreans have to die before they retaliate? My thinking is that a joint US-ROK massive retaliation may already be in the works. However, both parties know that NK isn't Iraq. They have a very real military capability. If we attack/punish them--even with just precision airstrikes--they will likely send a million troops over the border. So I guess the choice is put up with their shit, or engage in a massive military operation. Fun times.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #68 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Nice try at an Ad-Hom.



This was sammi jo presenting U. S. military actions in a negative light and so you tried to defend them. One was the no fly zone in Iraq which as we all know you've harped on several times in the past as a justification for invasion. I just decided to couinter that old falsehood before you started up again.

Here's your justification :

The list that sammi jo was presenting was about this :



I just picked one out of the list because you tried to justify it and it's one we've been over a million times in the past. And as I've told you before everytime you do try that I'll counter it.

Anything else where you want to call my mental health into question?

Are aware that SDW has placed you on his ignore list?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Welcome back to the ignore list. Effective 3:26 PM on 11/27.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #69 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerald apple View Post

Let us hope that Obama does not get us into another war with North Korea. we are fighting 2 wars already.I do not trust China at all!This a serious problem now.

Yes. The difference here and other recent wars is that N. Korea really has WMD that can reach us. The other difference is that they are allies with China which could pull them into any larger conflict.

Yes this is very serious and not something to take lightly. However I'm betting that China least of all wants a big war right now. They're feeling the pinch of global economic troubles just like everyone else. Their potential customers fighting isn't good for business. That's why I've said for years war isn't profitable any more. We have a global economy that makes everyone dependent on everyone else. War profit only works when you are independent entities. That's why these smaller wars are semi viable in the short run ( but still cost us more over all than we gain ) but a real war with a real threat that involves even larger allies just doesn't operate the same way.

The other thing is that N. Korea is a place we don't really know what they're likely to do. They might just be crazy enough to provoke a conflict. That's where China comes in to calm them down.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #70 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Are aware that SDW has placed you on his ignore list?

Yup! Why don't you ask him or trumpy what the've done when I put them on one in the past?

They've continued to reply to what I've said so I'm just doing the same thing. If they really hold to it they won't see my replies and it shouldn't bother them. Right? Well up to now we've tried several times ( and yes I notified them when I put them on one ) and it's never worked when I put them on one. That's why I laughed when trumpy threatened this.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #71 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I agree with your assessment. As much of a rising power as the Chinese are, they are still not well equipped enough feel confident in the face of a carrier battle group or two. For one thing, they always get their back hair up when we get close to "their" waters.

As for NK: I just wonder when the day comes that they go a step too far. They've already attacked a SK ship and shelled an island on top of all their other antics. I wonder how many South Koreans have to die before they retaliate? My thinking is that a joint US-ROK massive retaliation may already be in the works. However, both parties know that NK isn't Iraq. They have a very real military capability. If we attack/punish them--even with just precision airstrikes--they will likely send a million troops over the border. So I guess the choice is put up with their shit, or engage in a massive military operation. Fun times.

By the time the aircraft are launched by SK with permission from the US Command, the artillery along the DMZ will have heavily damaged many parts of Seoul. A full scale war on the peninsula will devastate the SK economy, impact China's, Japan's and the US economy. No they do not want a war with NK.

China must step up and rein in KJI and make sure KJU understands that they will have to toe the line. McCain is wrong about NK's economy....NK doesn't have one except the military and its nuclear and missile development programs. China, and the other powers taking part in the nuclear disarmament talks need to set some long term goals and force NK to quit playing these games.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #72 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I agree with your assessment. As much of a rising power as the Chinese are, they are still not well equipped enough feel confident in the face of a carrier battle group or two. For one thing, they always get their back hair up when we get close to "their" waters.

As for NK: I just wonder when the day comes that they go a step too far. They've already attacked a SK ship and shelled an island on top of all their other antics. I wonder how many South Koreans have to die before they retaliate? My thinking is that a joint US-ROK massive retaliation may already be in the works. However, both parties know that NK isn't Iraq. They have a very real military capability. If we attack/punish them--even with just precision airstrikes--they will likely send a million troops over the border. So I guess the choice is put up with their shit, or engage in a massive military operation. Fun times.

NK does it Palin style... do stupid shit to get attention at all cost.

China a "rising power" that's naive. China is "THE POWER". They finance our wars. Do you think they will finance a war with NK?
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #73 of 125
I wonder if the US, given the tension, should have stopped it's war games with SK, as China wanted. Strikes me that that could have helped ease things, instead of the tension being upped even higher.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #74 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I wonder if the US, given the tension, should have stopped it's war games with SK, as China wanted. Strikes me that that could have helped ease things, instead of the tension being upped even higher.

They almost certainly should have. But when you're the biggest kid on the block you do whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #75 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I wonder if the US, given the tension, should have stopped it's war games with SK, as China wanted. Strikes me that that could have helped ease things, instead of the tension being upped even higher.

Actually, China is engaged more because of the carrier in "their pond". What is happening in Korea is nothing new. For years SK has discovered tunnels under the DMZ that are several truck widths that lead to strategic points in SK. North Korean attack on South Korea: 8 provocations of the past decade. Nk was also responsible for downing US intelligence air craft flying in international air space and capturing the US Pueblo, and no war or bombing NK targets.

What happens now is more in China's ball park. They need to rein in the NK régime and work on long term solutions to keep them in check. Once NK develops nuclear weapons and has the capability to launch first strike nuclear confrontation, China will have little control of the little tyrants.....KJI is a nut case and China should have controlled NK before it got out hand.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #76 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Actually, China is engaged more because of the carrier in "their pond". What is happening in Korea is nothing new. For years SK has discovered tunnels under the DMZ that are several truck widths that lead to strategic points in SK. North Korean attack on South Korea: 8 provocations of the past decade. Nk was also responsible for downing US intelligence air craft flying in international air space and capturing the US Pueblo, and no war or bombing NK targets.

What happens now is more in China's ball park. They need to rein in the NK régime and work on long term solutions to keep them in check. Once NK develops nuclear weapons and has the capability to launch first strike nuclear confrontation, China will have little control of the little tyrants.....KJI is a nut case and China should have controlled NK before it got out hand.

My understanding isn't that China's particularly concerned about the US carrier in it's 200 mile zone, but instead that it wants the US to turn back. China by doing this is also sending a message to NK that it's not alone, which isn't that surprising.

Clearly SK want's to appear more resolved in its dealing with NK. To me that seems dangerous and to be honest futile. No doubt someone's putting votes ahead of lives in SK or the US is trying to get something out of China, or both.
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
"I have been made victorious by terror~ Muhammad

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam," ~ Barack Obama

Reply
post #77 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

....China a "rising power" that's naive. China is "THE POWER".... Do you think they will finance a war with NK?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I wonder if the US, given the tension, should have stopped it's war games with SK, as China wanted. Strikes me that that could have helped ease things, instead of the tension being upped even higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

They almost certainly should have. But when you're the biggest kid on the block you do whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want.

Perhaps China is playing the diplomacy game diplomacy needs ambiguity but SK has different views about the Complex Sino-NK relations limit Chinese diplomacy. This lead to The Cheonan Compromise: Chinese diplomacy in action which didn't really resolve the issue of SK-NK relations.

But NK has beenunresponsive to Chinese diplomacy in the past over misslie testing after the Cheonan incideent. Perhaps China can put pressure on NK by refusing to recognize the planned succession of KJI with KJU. China could also tie this with cutting military aid, controlling fuel and food exports to NK to only humanitarian uses.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #78 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

NK does it Palin style... do stupid shit to get attention at all cost.

China a "rising power" that's naive. China is "THE POWER". They finance our wars. Do you think they will finance a war with NK?

I don't think they'd view a war in their backyard as good for business.

As a matter of fact from what I've heard they're concerned that if N. Korea fell they'd have to deal with the flood of refuges that would come into China.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #79 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

My understanding isn't that China's particularly concerned about the US carrier in it's 200 mile zone, but instead that it wants the US to turn back. China by doing this is also sending a message to NK that it's not alone, which isn't that surprising.

Clearly SK want's to appear more resolved in its dealing with NK. To me that seems dangerous and to be honest futile. No doubt someone's putting votes ahead of lives in SK or the US is trying to get something out of China, or both.

Quote:
China warned the United States and South Korea Thursday against holding the war games near its waters, and urged them not to worsen tensions with its ally North Korea.

"China has expressed its serious concerns with relevant parties," said foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang in Beijing.

"We are firmly opposed to foreign military vessels engaging in activities that undermine China's security interests in the Yellow Sea or waters close to China."

If this sounds familiar, S.Korea to stage joint naval drill with US despite China protest, it's what happened after the sinking of the ROK ship, the Cheonan. The US and ROK naval forces stayed out of the Yellow Sea. There was speculation that the naval exercises were to occur on the west coast of Korea, thus causing tensions between the US and China over the incident. China did not pressure NK over the incident and here we are:
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #80 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I don't think they'd view a war in their backyard as good for business.

As a matter of fact from what I've heard they're concerned that if N. Korea fell they'd have to deal with the flood of refuges that would come into China.

North Korean Refugees in China have been a problem for China for decades. China does not want to compound it by a total collapse of the NK régime. What then can do is pressure KJI that China will not recognize the succession to KJU. They can force changes within the NK government where KJU will have power, but it will be more at China's discretion.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › North Korea Attacks South Korea