RE: OT - NKorea Situations (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

oldman45 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 1:03:42 AM)

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.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 1:46:23 AM)


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.



Terminus -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 1:58:11 AM)

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



wdolson -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 1:59:41 AM)

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



98ZJUSMC -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 2:40:22 AM)

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.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 3:59:17 AM)

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:



[image]local://upfiles/9475/C5CEE92CA7A74762AC54F326DC72249F.jpg[/image]



CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 4:37:32 AM)

The little guy up north has his foot on the nuclear trigger.

[image]local://upfiles/9475/EC6D5E73448B438FB8EBC87AB9A07AC0.jpg[/image]



budman999 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 5:05:34 AM)

Some more background that may explain the rising tensions:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/09/whats-annoying-the-north-koreans/print



ChezDaJez -> RE: NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 5:57:05 AM)


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



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 6:21:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

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



Content free, Terminus.

Par.



Bullwinkle58 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 6:41:14 AM)

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.





wdolson -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 6:54:39 AM)

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



CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 7:32:32 AM)

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



Sredni -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 8:28:42 AM)

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.



Rising-Sun -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 8:57:52 AM)

Yeah dont mess up my world in here lol, funny picture of Chuck Norris coming to shore up there.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 9:25:40 AM)


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



Terminus -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 11:06:14 AM)

Maybe nobody wanted war. I know, it's a terribly novel concept.



tocaff -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 11:40:02 AM)

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?



Chickenboy -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 12:37:46 PM)

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. [:D]

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.



oldman45 -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 12:46:59 PM)

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.



tocaff -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 1:41:27 PM)

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.



Chickenboy -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 2:06:03 PM)


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



AW1Steve -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 2:41:25 PM)

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. [:(]



David The Great -> RE: OT - NKorea Situations (4/10/2013 3:23:01 PM)

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



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875