Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: OT - NKorea Situations

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT - NKorea Situations Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 1:03:42 AM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		I have to disagree with your fifth paragraph Bull, in part anyway. While "we" are not a timid nation, our political leaders are. Our current bunch has not given me a lot of confidence that we would uphold our treaties. This is the first time in my life I really questioned if America would stand by its friends when the call came.

_____________________________


(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 91
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 1:46:23 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: oldman45

I have to disagree with your fifth paragraph Bull, in part anyway. While "we" are not a timid nation, our political leaders are. Our current bunch has not given me a lot of confidence that we would uphold our treaties. This is the first time in my life I really questioned if America would stand by its friends when the call came.


I don't know what objective evidence you have of that. Perhaps you are translating political dislike into something else. You might consult the ghost of OBL for a read on the curent administration's decisiveness. They don't do a lot of hollering about "evildoers!" or land on carriers or hang Mission Accomplished banners, but I wouldn't bet agaist the president where the S. Korean defense treaty is concerned. OTOH, he isn't going to land 100,000 troops to stroke his ego either. He doesn't need to. He's President of the United States. He fits the suit.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 92
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 1:58:11 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Aaaand there was the post that got this thread locked. *sarcastic slow clap*


_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 93
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 1:59:41 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		I warned y'all about expressing opinions of current and recent American politicians to avoid going down the rabbit hole. I have my own strongly held opinions, but I refrain from expressing them here because it's the wrong place for it. Matrix doesn't want political feuds on their forum.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 94
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 2:40:22 AM   
98ZJUSMC


Posts: 44
Joined: 3/16/2013
Status: offline
quote:

I have to disagree with your fifth paragraph Bull, in part anyway. While "we" are not a timid nation, our political leaders are. Our current bunch has not given me a lot of confidence that we would uphold our treaties. This is the first time in my life I really questioned if America would stand by its friends when the call came.


So, do I.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

I don't know what objective evidence you have of that. Perhaps you are translating political dislike into something else. You might consult the ghost of OBL for a read on the curent administration's decisiveness. They don't do a lot of hollering about "evildoers!" or land on carriers or hang Mission Accomplished banners, but I wouldn't bet agaist the president where the S. Korean defense treaty is concerned. OTOH, he isn't going to land 100,000 troops to stroke his ego either. He doesn't need to. He's President of the United States. He fits the suit.


In the interest of decorum and inappropriateness, I'll not comment on that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I haven't heard anything that tells me the NK's have bombs small enough to fit on their missiles.

As for China, yes they expended a million people in Korea, but that was 60 years ago. The current Chinese leadership is busy raking in the cash; they have little reason to go to war for the prolapsed sphincter that is North Korea.


A very different place. They have no love for NK, but it's their back yard.

< Message edited by 98ZJUSMC -- 4/10/2013 2:53:36 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 95
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 3:59:17 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		OK, looks like we need to redirect this to a less political direction.

The little guy up north does his best Washington Crossing the Delaware imitation:






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Commander Cody -- 4/10/2013 4:02:04 AM >

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to 98ZJUSMC)
Post #: 96
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 4:37:32 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		The little guy up north has his foot on the nuclear trigger.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 97
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 5:05:34 AM   
budman999


Posts: 34
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline 		Some more background that may explain the rising tensions:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/09/whats-annoying-the-north-koreans/print

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 98
RE: NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 5:57:05 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I'm responding to a previous post of somebody speculating about the NKs putting a bomb on an attack bomber and sending it towards a US/SK/Japanese target.

This is rhetoric. Like the Iranians; they've been screaming about removing Israel from the map for decades and it hasn't happened yet.



Yeah, a Mig-25 couldn't sneak in and land in Japan either...

The fact of the matter is a Mig-23 could reach Seoul in seconds... well before we had enough time to react. What is it? 20 miles from Kaesong to Seoul?

Whether a Mig-23 could evade radar and strike mainland Japan is anyone's guess. He is a desparate man and I would everything is on the table for him. He could certainly try to strike somewhere like FOSIF Kamiseya. That would put a huge dent in our electronic intel gathering capability if successful.

I agree this is most likely rhetoric... but its dangerous rhetoric that can lead to disaster. And to dismiss it out of hand is to simply to stick one's head up their behind and pray all is well.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 99
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 6:21:11 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Aaaand there was the post that got this thread locked. *sarcastic slow clap*



Content free, Terminus.

Par.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 100
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 6:41:14 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

I warned y'all about expressing opinions of current and recent American politicians to avoid going down the rabbit hole. I have my own strongly held opinions, but I refrain from expressing them here because it's the wrong place for it. Matrix doesn't want political feuds on their forum.

Bill


You did warn us, Mr. Moderator. You said "Just stay away from potential forum flashpoint issues like opinions about US politicians and I think this thread can stay active.

Bill "

Then there were posts critical of the current US administration. Posts #32, #52, #70, and #75. None drew moderator comment.

I made my first post in the thread at #83 with a long post covering the history of the Korean conflict, the status of the armistice, and some general comments about US foreign policy postures through history, China today, and the possible future of N. Korea. I made no political comments.

Following this, there were more overt anti-administration posts at #88 and #91. Neither drew moderator comment.

At that point I made an overt comment in part to show that not everyone on the forum is necessarily conservative, right-wing, Republican-voting, or a consumer of Fox News. I did this on purpose to see if my comment would be treated the same as the conservative comments listed above. Instead it drew instant warnings from you acting as moderator, responding to my post, followed by Terminus's usual zero-content drivel, followed in #95 by yet ANOTHER conservative political post.

I will bow out of this thread now, having made my point.




_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 101
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 6:54:39 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline 		All comments on the current or recent administrations are out of bounds. I can't monitor every thread 24/7. Some comments slipped through without comment on my part. It was not due to political bias on my part.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 102
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 7:32:32 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		Regarding my comment #88, please don't take that as a slam on the current administration. It's a slam on USG policy since the 1960s (i.e. no retaliation for actual, physical North Korean provocations)--all political parties, all persuasions--and I foresee the policy continuing regardless of who is in the White House. As a corollary, I'd like to see the South gain confidence that it can and should become fully responsible for its own defense.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 103
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 8:28:42 AM   
Sredni

 

Posts: 705
Joined: 9/30/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline 		As an outsider looking in with zero stake in any of this, I must admit I had a little giggle at the thought that america wouldn't intervene because it's too "timid" as some posters have said. Just ignore the past 10 years I guess.

man... so hard to say anything about this without running afoul of the no politics rules, or offending delicate sensibilities. Bleh, I just deleted several paragraphs. meh I can't find a way to say what I want without hitting mines, so I guess that's it.

I did enjoy reading bullwinkles posts and found his points (especially his last one) insightful.

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 104
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 8:57:52 AM   
Rising-Sun


Posts: 2082
Joined: 11/5/2009
From: Clifton Park, NY
Status: offline 		Yeah dont mess up my world in here lol, funny picture of Chuck Norris coming to shore up there.

_____________________________


(in reply to Sredni)
Post #: 105
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 9:25:40 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sredni

As an outsider looking in with zero stake in any of this, I must admit I had a little giggle at the thought that america wouldn't intervene because it's too "timid" as some posters have said. Just ignore the past 10 years I guess.



OK, just to make sure people get what I'm saying, if North Korea were to launch a full-scale invasion of South Korea of course the U.S. would uphold its end of the alliance and use the troops already here and send in reinforcements. That's the main reason why the North won't go all the way and why its threats are so much hot air.

I'm talking about the numerous small-scale armistice violations North Korea has committed over the years, many of which have killed U.S. and South Korean soldiers and South Korean civilians. See this for a partial list of these incidents. This list includes the torpedoing of a ROK corvette and the firing of rockets at an inhabited South Korean island in 2010. The U.S. hasn't retaliated against these incidents and generally does its best to moderate the South Korean response, if any.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Sredni)
Post #: 106
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 11:06:14 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Maybe nobody wanted war. I know, it's a terribly novel concept.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 107
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 11:40:02 AM   
tocaff


Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline 		The real problem as I see it is that if you keep pressing the other guy's button often enough you'll finally trigger a different than expected response. That's where things can spiral out of control. How many times has history shown us (I'm a believer in the Cyclical Theory of History) a simple miscalculation of the other guy ends in conflict?

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 108
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 12:37:46 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline 		I find it amusing to see repeat 'offenders' of the polemic 'no-politics' rule posting repeatedly here and then expressing surprise or outrage when getting called on it. True to their nature, they become increasingly shrill and standoffish, loud and arrogant. Then they promise to not post any more on the topic. Until they do. Repeatedly. Makes me snicker.

There's not an opinion they can't share, not a subject they're not experten about, not a point of view of theirs that, in their opinion, isn't terribly unique and thoughtful. They're always right (you're always wrong), so you'd just better get used to this new reality. There's not a thread that they aren't willing to crap all over, so they can get their opinion heard (repeatedly). Yawn...

That, friends, is what the green button is for. Use it.

_____________________________


(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 109
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 12:46:59 PM   
oldman45


Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/1/2005
From: Jacksonville Fl
Status: offline 		Bullwinkle, I read through that piece you linked. I came away from it with a better understanding of the issues but I don't see how changing the armistice to a peace treaty will ever happen. I am convinced that there would need to be another war on the peninsula to end it once and for all. Either the South and her allies get over run or the North is utterly destroyed and unified with the South, then rebuilt with a Marshall type plan.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 110
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 1:41:27 PM   
tocaff


Posts: 4781
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline 		There won't be a Marshall type plane unless China finances it. The US is already to deep in debt and the populace would never stand for it. Imagine rebuilding Samsung, LG, Hyundai, etc. at the expense of the US taxpayer who didn't like the recent bailouts of US corporations and screamed bloody murder when it was discovered that a foreign company benefited from it.

_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to oldman45)
Post #: 111
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 2:06:03 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tocaff

There won't be a Marshall type plane unless China finances it. The US is already to deep in debt and the populace would never stand for it. Imagine rebuilding Samsung, LG, Hyundai, etc. at the expense of the US taxpayer who didn't like the recent bailouts of US corporations and screamed bloody murder when it was discovered that a foreign company benefited from it.

An interesting article from a few years ago. I remember thinking then (as I do now), that I wouldn't shed a tear if this happened. Couldn't be any worse for North Korea and it certainly wouldn't be the only country that China has 'annexed' in the last 75 years:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/KG16Ad01.html

_____________________________


(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 112
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 2:41:25 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 14507
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: Mordor Illlinois
Status: offline 		As apparently we are facing the locking of this particular thread, I would like to apologize for any contribution or cause of that outcome that I may be responsible for. I have deleted any comments that I made, and request anyone who "quoted me" would be so good as to delete that quote. Sorry Bill, I honestly don't get up in the morning thinking "How can I push a moderator's buttons?". I keep saying "I'll be good, I won't go over the line this time". Once again , I'll try to restrict my comments to inane "chatter" posts, discussing the weather or other "safe" topics. I especially apologize to Rising Sun, as I really didn't mean to contribute to a poetential locking of your thread.

Commenting on this thread is like watching a car wreck while driving. You shouldn't let it distract you from your driving, but you just can' help it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 113
RE: OT - NKorea Situations - 4/10/2013 3:23:01 PM   
David The Great

 

Posts: 98
Joined: 10/3/2008
Status: offline 		1 Russia is not communist
2 North korea anc china fought the Us , the most powerfull nation during the korean war to a standstill.
3 you do not need a missile to get a nuke to the US

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 114
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT - NKorea Situations Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.969