Confed999

What makes you better than them?
That depends how many more decades we go before doing something. How many should die before it's worth doing something?
That's funny, because it's the only reason I can see a war possibly be being worth it.

__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

Horrido

Two big, BIG problems with North Korea and invasion/reunification. First-off, the population is SERIOUSLY brainwashed into total compliance with the regime. Kim Jung Il IS their god. Despite how they are dying from famine, they've still got it better than the rest of the world, at least in their minds. Now, for the other side of the coin, if they ever learn how good it really is in China and South Korea, it's going to be a massive exodus, and neither the PRC nor SK can afford or support that. The other issue is reunification. South Korea saw what reunification did to West and East Germany, and it wasn't economically pretty. North Korea is exponentially worse-off than East Germany was. South Korea does not want to absorb and get tanked by North Korea's problems.

__________________
The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.

Horrido

And for Ray's enjoyment:

Way back in nineteen-forty-two or maybe forty-three,
I sailed with Captain Tuna, the chicken of the sea.
We didn't sink the Bismarck , no matter what they say,
For when we seen the German ships, we sailed the other way.
We seen torpedos comin' and we saw a periscope.
We were full of fightin' spirit and our souls were full o' hope.
The captain yelled, "Now hear this!" He really flipped his lid.
We haven't yet begun to fight. What's more, we never did.

Oh, we didn't sink the Bismarck and we didn't fight at all.
We spend our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball,
Chasin' after women while our ship was overhauled,
A-livin' it up on grapefruit juice and sickbay alcohol.


Then they made me a frogman on the demolition team.
I sunk a battleship, a cruiser, and a submarine.
I blew up ammunition dumps. I did my best to please.
I did it all before the Navy sent me overseas.


Tony, our Italian cook, was a-settin' on the deck,
And we were a-peelin' 'taters. We must 'a' peeled a peck.
The captain yelled, "Hey, Tony! Is that a U-boat I see?"
Tony says, "It's not-a my boat; it's-a no belong to me."


Oh, we didn't sink the Bismarck and we didn't fight at all.
We spend our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball,
Chasin' after women while our ship was overhauled,
A-livin' it up on grapefruit juice and sickbay alcohol.


And now the war is over and our story can be told
About our captain's fightin' and the young ones and the old.
We stayed in San Francisco , away from the battle scenes.
We spent our time on Treasure Island a-fightin' the Marines.


Oh, we didn't sink the Bismarck and we didn't fight at all.
We spend our time in Norfolk and we really had a ball,
Chasin' after women while our ship was overhauled,
A-livin' it up on grapefruit juice and sickbay alcohol.

huh_what

NOthing. But the truth is that the US is in no position to make war if a governmentis killing off their own. Look at mao zedong, stalin, and rwanda; only if NK attacks SK or japan or attempts to will a war be justified.

How about Rwanda? US didn't give a crap about Rwandans, why would they care about the north koreans. Go to Africa and give them help, they want it, north koreans don't.

I wonder how the general public would like the idea of sending tens of thousands of people to NK to do what... "liberate the people". North koreans don't want to be liberated. They live in a totalitarian society and this is perfectly normal for them. Just like in the book 1984. Even south koreans don't like the US presence in the peninsula. Also, North koreans are brought up to believe that the US/SK started the Korean War. THe NK society is a militaristic society. Kids are though how to fight in the schools and it is mendatory for men serve for over a decade in the militrary. A liberation force of US/SK troops will be mistaken as another invasion force. All the economy/citizen effort is to support the military. Making war on the NK military is like making war on the people.

Ray

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Confed999

Why should it just be the US? I don't think we're on the same page here, go back and read my first post in this thread...
Yeah, look at them, and ask if realpolitik is worth it...
Yeah, how about Rwanda too?
I support that too, as well as Cuba, Parts of South America, most of the Middle East, and huge chunks of Asia...
Anyone who doesn't is part of the reason tyrants exist in the first place.
So a child in an abusive situation is ok? I mean after all, it's perfectly normal for them...
Kinda like fighting Germany and Japan 60 years ago?

huh_what

The whole point is that if you make war to save the north koreans, you are basically doing what you tried to prevent in the first place. You are worried about koreans dying. Well is a war going to stop that? The NK people are the military. What will happen if the regime does fall? there going to be a unification which add to the economic problems of the south...etc etc. So why lose thousands of SK lives and American lives and make America look like a bully to the rest of the world when it just oges back to square 1. The manpower/funding could be used elsewhere where it would be more beneficial. Rmember that NK don't want help, they will die for their dictator.

huh_what

why the hell would South KOreans support a war(starting a war) with the Nkoreans. They are practically the same people.

I dont thing NK and Kil Jung Il care much about international image

A million people were killed. US didn't intervene beacuse what's there to gain from it? SAme goes for NK. A peaceful unification is a better way to set up occupation in China's backyard. A war with NK could trigger another Chinese intervention, which adds more problems, more deaths, more economic ruin for the future Korea.

I support it too. Lets use the money/efforts where it will be most beneficial.

It's human nature. They don't want families and friends, and their tax dollars go to a war effort to help people that are their potential enemies, who constantly threaten to do sh*t.

A war isn't going to help much with that either.

Yes- except that the whole point of the war that you want is to help the korean people- which practically beats its purpose because what is there to destroy and who is there to kill when you are supposed to be liberating them. In awar into Nk, you see the koreans as friendlies, they see you as foes; therefore you have to respond as if they were foes.

huh_what

i do want to help the North Koreans- i just dont think that "punishing" Kim Jung Il or starting a war would do much good
Just look at his f__ked up country.

Attached Images

	1.jpg (26.4 KB, 144 views)
	2.jpg (28.9 KB, 150 views)
	3.jpg (31.5 KB, 157 views)
	4.jpg (74.8 KB, 185 views)
	5.GIF (33.9 KB, 141 views)

Confed999

It will stop the purposeful starvation, torture, execution, enslavement, and imprisonment of people, yes.
Best bet is new country.
Last I checked, everyone starving, being tortured, being executed, being falsely imprisoned, wanted help...
The same reason all free peoples should support the removal of any tyranical regime, because we're all practically the same people. Again, I ask why should it just be the US, or even just the US and SK, or even just the US and SK and UK and Japan? Honestly, if SK doesn't care what's happening to the people in NK, they're no better than NK.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Please reread what I quoted, then what I said. I wasn't talking to them, I was talking to you.
Realpolitik at work, something you've obviously given your trust too. Those people are dead because of that trust.
How can you support one, and not the other? Too much hypocracy for me.
Actually it would go to defeat an enemy of humanity, and to help potential friends.
So then you say that's ok. Well I think I know where you're comming from now. Unlike you, I won't sit back and allow things like that to happen.
Anyone who fights for a tyrant is the enemy. Plain and simple.
Waiting around to see if things get better, when all reasonable evidence points to the opposite, does no good. In fact, from their government's threats and continuing campaign of weapons over food, it could end up costing millions of more lives. I'll take "not much" over "none" any day...

HistoricalDavid

Huh_what, Rwanda occured soon after the 1993 US intervention in Somalia - the 'highlight' of which was 19 American deaths, including Randy Shugart's and Gary Gordon's bodies being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. Of course they didn't intervene on a major scale, though there were some special forces there. Rwanda should have been sorted out but at least show some understanding for that temporary aberration!

Thankfully, Reagan didn't think that back in the '80s about the Warsaw Pact.

Africans want help? They've made exceedingly poor use of the aid and military intervention so far!

Plus, brush up on your history about the US's attitude to the Rwandan genocide.

I suppose, when I was four months old and Romania's communist government fell, I didn't want to be liberated?

Did the Soviets and Eastern Europeans not want to be liberated?

You underestimate human resolve.



By force.

Quote:

Originally Posted by huh_what What if he doesn't and his regime falls and what if there is a unification without a bloodshed?

It would be nice for that to happen.

But your view is akin to saying "You can cross the road and not look both ways, and there's a good chance you won't be run over."

A lot of that artillery may well be taken out in the first few hours of a war, and if it isn't...?

Cities throughout the twentieth century have been shelled and bombed and they didn't collapse. There may be a few thousand Seouleans killed but the end benefit may be 22 million North Koreans freed and the South safe from invasion.

There are about 20,000 US troops deployed right now but given a few months, like in 1990, the capabilities of US logistics are considerable. A force of hundreds of thousands of US troops alone, not counting other coalition members, will be able to aid the 700,000-odd South Korean troops. Not to mention, US airpower is available readily all over the world.

That won't stop it. Iraq is less convincing a case than NK.



Right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by huh_what why the hell would South KOreans support a war(starting a war) with the Nkoreans. They are practically the same people.

So?

Confed999

I like you Dave, you're alright in my book.

HistoricalDavid

You too, Mr. Libertarian.

huh_what

what are you talking about. You are trying trying to save the people. Everyone fights for the tyrant in North Korea.

Against a 900.000 uniformed NK soldiers and citizens who support them. Unlike the first Korean war, US soldiers won't be welcomed by the north koreans. Even the SK want the US military presence out.

I thought the whole purpose of the war was to liberate and help the people. You won't be doing that by killing them.

Result of American Media?

Thats what it is now.

You asked if Stalin and Mao Zedong thought realpolitik was worth it. Kim Jung Il wouldnt give a crap about it.

With out caring about the consequence? Would China just sit back and not do anything while its ally and bufferzone between US allies is being attacked?

War is help?

HOw can you want war with NK but help them at the same time? Isn't that hypocracy

HistoricalDavid

What are YOU talking about? How on earth can you guarantee that?



Have I not implicitly stated that quantity is not everything? At the very least each South Korean serviceman could kill at least several North Korean servicemen. And the South Koreans won't support troops who are trying to stop them being shelled.

Idiots. That US military presence will act as a 'tripwire' guaranteeing massive US intervention.

Killing SOME of them. Some civilians will inevitably be killed but 22 million will be freed.

Here we go again, with the 'No, they aren't really starving (!)' line...

Face it, the North Koreans have to get food and medicine from the South, Japan, China and the United States, in exchange for WMD moratoria, which they promptly break.

It might well. It certainly doesn't have the military capability to initiate a successful military campaign or retaliation against the US, much less the will considering their lucrative exports to the US.

Yup. France, Germany, Japan, the Balkans countries, perhaps even the Warsaw Pact all agree.

Thus the limited nature of your thinking on this matter is revealed.

You can't think in more than one stage, can you?

Can't you make the mental leap to analysing what benefits the war may bring?

Ultimately, even if the North Koreans all support their leader and government, a war would utterly destroy their military, just like the Gulf War did to Iraq's. Hence, a threat to three quite liberal democracies, South Korea, Japan and the United States, is REMOVED.

And I like that.