Smallc Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 The war games have started. We are are now counting on NK to show restraint to avoid a major war Actions by brutal dictators cannot go unchallenged. This is about the most docile action you could expect SK and the US to take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Actions by brutal dictators cannot go unchallenged. This is about the most docile action you could expect SK and the US to take. What we needed is for both sides to try to calm the situation down and de-escalate things. Both sides could have taken measures conducive to do that and neither side did. Actions by brutal dictators cannot go unchallenged. That sort of "tit for tat" shit could cost millions of lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 What we needed is for both sides to try to calm the situation down and de-escalate things. Both sides could have taken measures conducive to do that and neither side did. That sort of "tit for tat" shit could cost millions of lives. At what point in time do we stop appeasing dictators and confront them? And de-escalte for what reason??? So North Korea can try to extort more from us? As I said before,anyone who thought this particular situation would stay like this forever is dreaming in technicolour.At some point in time,the end of this war(that's never really ended) has to happen...And sadly,people are going to die... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alta4ever Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) That sort of "tit for tat" shit could cost millions of lives. When did SK sink a NK ship in retaliation? since they are conducting in tit for tat according to you? Who started the shelling hmmm. Who is the problem dre, or is it habit for you to come to comfort of dictators and despots? Or is that those sk capitalists fault for waving their success in the nose for the failing north Korean state? Edited November 28, 2010 by Alta4ever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 At what point in time do we stop appeasing dictators and confront them? And de-escalte for what reason??? So North Korea can try to extort more from us? As I said before,anyone who thought this particular situation would stay like this forever is dreaming in technicolour.At some point in time,the end of this war(that's never really ended) has to happen...And sadly,people are going to die... Doing live fire drills in a disputed area is a provocation. How do you think the US would respond if a couple of its potential adversaries were doing live fire drills off the coast of Florida? Do you believe for a second that wouldnt be viewed as a major provocation? Theres a difference between not appeasing them, and deliberately provoking them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Doing live fire drills in a disputed area is a provocation. How do you think the US would respond if a couple of its potential adversaries were doing live fire drills off the coast of Florida? Do you believe for a second that wouldnt be viewed as a major provocation? Theres a difference between not appeasing them, and deliberately provoking them. Fair enough...However you're giving me one instance.. How many times has that Stalinist regime flaunted agreements that it has signed to extort money,goods, and military hardware AND start/restart its nuclear program? At what point in time do you confront this??? It's a simple question... Or,in your mind,do we simply avoid what seem to be(at least to me) an inevitable confrontation at all costs??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 When did SK sink a NK ship in retaliation? since they are conducting in tit for tat according to you? Who started the shelling hmmm. Who is the problem dre, or is it habit for you to come to comfort of dictators and despots? Or is that those sk capitalists fault for waving their success in the nose for the failing north Korean state? Exactly. Ignorant people like dre love to play the "why can't both sides just get along" card, even though we all know which side is the aggressor. South Korea hasn't done shit to anybody in decades. North Korea sinks ships, flaunts nuclear proliferation treaties, fires missiles constantly, almost hitting Japan recently. And idiots like dre continue to hope for "both sides" to calm things down. It's beyond ridiculous. :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 When did SK sink a NK ship in retaliation? since they are conducting in tit for tat according to you? Who started the shelling hmmm. Who is the problem dre, or is it habit for you to come to comfort of dictators and despots? Or is that those sk capitalists fault for waving their success in the nose for the failing north Korean state? Sinking that ship was an incredibly stupid act theres no question. Where we disagree is on the wisdom of escalating this into a major conflict when you have half a million people within range of the largest artillery battery in history. Its a LOSE LOSE proposition for both sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Exactly. Ignorant people like dre love to play the "why can't both sides just get along" card, even though we all know which side is the aggressor. South Korea hasn't done shit to anybody in decades. North Korea sinks ships, flaunts nuclear proliferation treaties, fires missiles constantly, almost hitting Japan recently. And idiots like dre continue to hope for "both sides" to calm things down. It's beyond ridiculous. :angry: Oh oh... little baby gonna cry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Sinking that ship was an incredibly stupid act theres no question. Where we disagree is on the wisdom of escalating this into a major conflict when you have half a million people within range of the largest artillery battery in history. Its a LOSE LOSE proposition for both sides. Yes...War is generally a bad thing,however,at what point in time do we confront this regime without giving in to its demands?? I never bought Iraq as one of the "Axis of evil"...Iran and North Korea....They definately qualify.If I was going to confront anyone,it would be the crazy people with the nuclear bombs and missiles.... And another question... Let's say the West plays ball and gives into North Korea this time to keep the "peace"....What will the next act of defiance from North Korea be?? Missile strike on Seoul??? Nuclear missile strike on Tokyo? My point is,historically speaking,the longer we try to prolong this phony peace,the worse the real and inevitable confrontation will be... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Oh oh... little baby gonna cry? The Professor should really zip it...He really does'nt help anything.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Fair enough...However you're giving me one instance.. How many times has that Stalinist regime flaunted agreements that it has signed to extort money,goods, and military hardware AND start/restart its nuclear program? At what point in time do you confront this??? It's a simple question... Or,in your mind,do we simply avoid what seem to be(at least to me) an inevitable confrontation at all costs??? Or,in your mind,do we simply avoid what seem to be(at least to me) an inevitable confrontation at all costs??? No not at all costs. Theres clearly a line where once its crossed all out war is unavoidable. We probably just draw it in a different place. If Im the SK government, and I know that half a million South Koreans are within range or North Korean artillery, and I know the guy with his finger on the button is stupid/crazy enough to use it, then Im going to try to avoid that. And If I DO think that war is unavoidable then Im gonna be the one that decides how it starts and when, and Im gonna try to move as many assets as possible out of range first. If you think war is inevitable Jack, then why would you support fucking around with stupid little war games that may result in an unpredictable response that youre stuck having to react to? If war is what you want then you should be launching a massive attack on NK artillery positions when they least expect it and try to take them all out within the first couple of hours. Not floundering around in the yellow sea playing stupid games that might cause a situation where youre not in the drivers seat. All that theyre doing is giving NK a strategic advantage, by pushing them into striking first. This is phenomenally stupid. If theres gonna be war then 1/2 of NK's artillery should be desetroyed before they even know its time to dance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Yes...War is generally a bad thing,however,at what point in time do we confront this regime without giving in to its demands?? I never bought Iraq as one of the "Axis of evil"...Iran and North Korea....They definately qualify.If I was going to confront anyone,it would be the crazy people with the nuclear bombs and missiles.... And another question... Let's say the West plays ball and gives into North Korea this time to keep the "peace"....What will the next act of defiance from North Korea be?? Missile strike on Seoul??? Nuclear missile strike on Tokyo? My point is,historically speaking,the longer we try to prolong this phony peace,the worse the real and inevitable confrontation will be... My point is,historically speaking,the longer we try to prolong this phony peace,the worse the real and inevitable confrontation will be... Like I said. Even if you accept that as true, then theres no point in fucking around with war games in the yellow sea that might provoke a large first strike by NK. Its a major strategic blunder, and 10 times as many South Koreans more would probably die than if SK was the initiator and and was able to take out a subtancial ammount of NK artillery first. I assume that SK and the US already have plans in place to blitz North Korean artillery positions and minimize the ammount of damage they can do. Can you explain to me why you would risk the war starting in a manner that those batteries fired on you BEFORE your blitz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 No not at all costs. Theres clearly a line where once its crossed all out war is unavoidable. We probably just draw it in a different place. If Im the SK government, and I know that half a million South Koreans are within range or North Korean artillery, and I know the guy with his finger on the button is stupid/crazy enough to use it, then Im going to try to avoid that. And If I DO think that war is unavoidable then Im gonna be the one that decides how it starts and when, and Im gonna try to move as many assets as possible out of range first. If you think war is inevitable Jack, then why would you support fucking around with stupid little war games that may result in an unpredictable response that youre stuck having to react to? If war is what you want then you should be launching a massive attack on NK artillery positions when they least expect it and try to take them all out within the first couple of hours. Not floundering around in the yellow sea playing stupid games that might cause a situation where youre not in the drivers seat. All that theyre doing is giving NK a strategic advantage, by pushing them into striking first. This is phenomenally stupid. If theres gonna be war then 1/2 of NK's artillery should be desetroyed before they even know its time to dance. First of all...Stop trying to paint me as a war mongerer... I simply don't see this as a tenable situation any longer...I also think the war game stuff is really pussyfooting around.Frankly,after you've committed an act of war by sinking a naval vessel,there should have been an extremely harsh response... The fact of the matter is,I don't think North Korea really wants a full blown military confligration.I think they do these small,almost terrorist-like,operations to extort things from the West.One could look at this war game stuff next week as not giving in to the terrorist actions of the Stalinist regime in Pyongyang...However,they will only continue this if we keep giving in to them...And thosethings will only escalte to get what North Korea wants... So what would be your line of sand where war would simply be inevitable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) Like I said. Even if you accept that as true, then theres no point in fucking around with war games in the yellow sea that might provoke a large first strike by NK. Its a major strategic blunder, and 10 times as many South Koreans more would probably die than if SK was the initiator and and was able to take out a subtancial ammount of NK artillery first. I assume that SK and the US already have plans in place to blitz North Korean artillery positions and minimize the ammount of damage they can do. Can you explain to me why you would risk the war starting in a manner that those batteries fired on you BEFORE your blitz? To your last point.... Optics...Public sympathy for a war... And China is sitting there ...Just watching... Edited November 28, 2010 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 First of all...Stop trying to paint me as a war mongerer... I simply don't see this as a tenable situation any longer...I also think the war game stuff is really pussyfooting around.Frankly,after you've committed an act of war by sinking a naval vessel,there should have been an extremely harsh response... The fact of the matter is,I don't think North Korea really wants a full blown military confligration.I think they do these small,almost terrorist-like,operations to extort things from the West.One could look at this war game stuff next week as not giving in to the terrorist actions of the Stalinist regime in Pyongyang...However,they will only continue this if we keep giving in to them...And thosethings will only escalte to get what North Korea wants... So what would be your line of sand where war would simply be inevitable? First of all...Stop trying to paint me as a war mongerer... Im not. Im simply asking you... if war is "inevitable" what is the possible reason for this provocative little war game? If youve really decided its time to dance then then thats an extremely stupid thing to do because your giving them the luxury of a first strike at full capacity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 To your last point.... Optics...Public sympathy for a war... And China is sitting there ...Just watching... Those are some pretty expensive optics, and thats a good way to get an awful lot of people killed for no good reason. I dont see why public sympathy matters anyways. If SK feels that all out war is a forgone conclusion they should cancel the war games claiming they want to avoid confrontation. Then they should get their people into shelters, move whatever assets they can out of range, and blitz NK artillery positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Like I said. Even if you accept that as true, then theres no point in fucking around with war games in the yellow sea that might provoke a large first strike by NK. Its a major strategic blunder No, it's not a blunder. It's their right as a sovereign nation. Many countries conduct war games, or practice drills. They have every right to. Seriously, what the hell's your problem? South Korea has been as passive as a country can be for several decades. North Korea is constantly causing problems, and constantly making up excuses for it's actions. And why? Because there's gullible people in the world like you that will suck it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) No, it's not a blunder. It's their right as a sovereign nation. Many countries conduct war games, or practice drills. They have every right to. Seriously, what the hell's your problem? South Korea has been as passive as a country can be for several decades. North Korea is constantly causing problems, and constantly making up excuses for it's actions. And why? Because there's gullible people in the world like you that will suck it up. It's their right as a sovereign nation. So what? That doesnt make it smart. Its Irans right as a sovereign nation to do live fire drills a couple hundred miles off the coast of Florida. It would be stupid though. It was Russias right as a sovereign nation to put military assets in Cuba... that wasnt smart either. Edited November 28, 2010 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 No, it's not a blunder. It's their right as a sovereign nation. Many countries conduct war games, or practice drills. They have every right to. Seriously, what the hell's your problem? South Korea has been as passive as a country can be for several decades. North Korea is constantly causing problems, and constantly making up excuses for it's actions. And why? Because there's gullible people in the world like you that will suck it up. Professor... Why don't you do yourself a huge favour by allowing those with the intellectual capacity to discuss world issues respectfully,to do so,and butt out... Your clueless ramblings don't help anything! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 So what? That doesnt make it smart. Its Irans right as a sovereign nation to do live fire drills a couple hundred miles off the coast of Florida. It would be stupid though. It was Russias right as a sovereign nation to put military assets in Cuba... that wasnt smart either. Nor was it smart for Neville Chamberlain to get a signed document from Herr Schickelgruber and get off a plane proclaiming "Peace in our time"... The "peace" we "enjoy" between North and South Korea is a fabricated phony peace... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Like I said. Even if you accept that as true, then theres no point in fucking around with war games in the yellow sea that might provoke a large first strike by NK. Its a major strategic blunder, and 10 times as many South Koreans more would probably die than if SK was the initiator and and was able to take out a subtancial ammount of NK artillery first. I assume that SK and the US already have plans in place to blitz North Korean artillery positions and minimize the ammount of damage they can do. Can you explain to me why you would risk the war starting in a manner that those batteries fired on you BEFORE your blitz? Just to set the record straight, this all started when North Korea invaded the South in 1950. The aggressor has always been the North. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 The "peace" we "enjoy" between North and South Korea is a fabricated phony peace... Most definitely...and peace with a land controlled by propaganda and ruled by a crazy person can't go on forever. At the same time, South Koreans cannot forever live in fear of a dictatorial regime and a controlled population that lies just to the North. The current situation is quite untenable, and will not continue forever...or possibly much longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 (edited) Professor... Why don't you do yourself a huge favour by allowing those with the intellectual capacity to discuss world issues respectfully,to do so,and butt out... Your clueless ramblings don't help anything! Oh I dont know... Hes not without value. Picture you and I were talking about this over a beer down at the local watering hole... and a crazy retard sporting colorful clown pants and a hockey helmet runs past our table shrieking "GRETZY!!! GRETZKY!!!", while repeatedly smashing his palm into his own forehead. I guess some people might get mad, but I bet you wed have a howl over it and order another beer!. Edited November 28, 2010 by dre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted November 28, 2010 Report Share Posted November 28, 2010 Its Irans right as a sovereign nation to do live fire drills a couple hundred miles off the coast of Florida. Complete nonsense. It was Russias right as a sovereign nation to put military assets in Cuba More complete nonsense. Which other of South Korea's rights as a country are you willing to give up to appease Kim Jong Ill? When Russia and China held joint military exercises a few months ago, where was your outrage about that? I didn't seem to hear any. Only now, when a democratic country wishes to hold what amounts to practice drills IN IT'S OWN TERRITORY, are you drawing a line. Pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.