N. Korea declares war on S. Korea, which means...? - Page 6 - Politics and Economics

If North Korea attacked South Korea, I don't think the US should get involved at all. However, if they attacked the US obviously they have to get involved.

The myopic fantasy life of libertarians..****st be nice.

04-04-2013 , 12:14 PM

#127

UFO1947

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 5,098

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

I generally don't give a **** about treaties. Other countries need to deal with their own ****, imo.

So, should France have just let Britian swallow the colonies back up in 1776?

04-04-2013 , 12:15 PM

#128

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Not supporting the south is pretty laughable.

04-04-2013 , 12:45 PM

#129

spike420211

banned

Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 9,509

Quote:

Chinese organised coup to replace the leadership with someone less insane

I'd be happy w/ Norkland becoming a PRC "autonomous territory". Like Tibet, minus the yaks. They could build massive vacant cities there...

04-04-2013 , 04:22 PM

#130

Turn Prophet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 11,558

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

Not supporting the south is pretty laughable.

LiiiiiiiirrrrrrvvvvvAAAAAAAA

04-04-2013 , 04:48 PM

#131

Brons

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 6,565

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken

New leader, different internal dynamics, changing world = new ballgame. What has happened in the past is not necessarily what we should expect now.

All you people who are saying yaya they've done this before....did you see the graphic NK put out? Did you see that a man who controls a million man army and has nukes has publicly depicted his army blowing up the Whitehouse? Now it would seem that that is a goal which is out of reach so literally it's not that scary but what it's suggests about what they are thinking is scary. And the map depicting missile strikes on our cities? you saw that too right? You know that that is a communication from a state with a million man army and nukes and not some dudes scribbling in a cave?

I don't get scared when I see a schizophrenic homeless guy walking down the street. I don't get scared when I see an obviously sane man walking down the street with a gun. But if I saw a schizophrenic bum walking down the street with a loaded gun I would be scared.

The fact that the map was technically incorrect should tell you enough. This stuff is for internal consumption and they have been doing this since forever. Just forget it.

04-04-2013 , 05:46 PM

#132

surftheiop

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 5,162

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ratamahatta;37913010[B

]I wish NK would fire a rocket somewhere, a war would break out, NK would of course lose and NK and SK would unite under a democratic government. [/B]This status quo is killing me! But nothing will happen. I wish NK had oil.

IIRC NK has a crap ton of various artillery that can hit seol, I think there would be pretty substantial losses for SK if an all out war breaks out, which I why I think its rather unlikely to happen

04-04-2013 , 07:09 PM

#133

Ratamahatta

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,157

Quote:

Originally Posted by surftheiop

IIRC NK has a crap ton of various artillery that can hit seol, I think there would be pretty substantial losses for SK if an all out war breaks out, which I why I think its rather unlikely to happen

Oh yes, definitely. Seoul is located only 25-50 miles from SK-NK border, so if NK will start shelling we will see many casualties. But I can't see how oppression of NK people can be stopped any other way then a total regime change as a result of US intervention. A total collapse like we have seen in Soviet Union around 1990 is not going to happen any time soon.

04-04-2013 , 07:20 PM

#134

Deuces McKracken

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 9,335

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brons

The fact that the map was technically incorrect should tell you enough. This stuff is for internal consumption and they have been doing this since forever. Just forget it.

They haven't been doing this forever and "they" is a constantly shifting behemoth with a new leader with an entirely different history than the previous leaders. Our analysts say he has "something to prove" which is always a position which puts people in danger but in a fascist regime it's especially dangerous. Your two second analysis is just crap to make you feel better. I wish I was so simple minded that it made me feel better.

Do we really know how China would react to us funneling in troops over there in the event something jumped off? Is the nuclear option off the table since the fallout would reach China? If we can't nuke them what are our options if we go to war? I just don't see this playing out well for us because their military is massive and I don't see us backing down either. Imagine what would happen if we had some psychotic repub like Bush presiding over this? That could happen 3 years and change from right now. I would say that NK would be attacked under the Bush doctrine inasmuch as it was an actual doctrine and not just an excuse. We know they have nukes and they said they are aimed at us. At this point even a Barrack Obama has to be thinking how stupid he would feel if NK did take a shot, get lucky and hit Guam. I could see the embarrassment Barrack's face as he answers the accusation "They said they were going to do it. Why didn't you strike at that point?"

04-04-2013 , 07:33 PM

#135

There Is A Light

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 4,923

Quote:

Originally Posted by Howard Beale

Isn't there a treaty or something? And if this stuff keeps up Japan has to develop nuclear weapons. Bad all around.

Treaties are the dangerous thing, they are what can cause rapid, irrational escalation. WW1 started because all of Europe had millions of treaties on the go.

04-04-2013 , 08:18 PM

#136

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

The Nazis might not have risen to power if it werent for a treaty.

04-04-2013 , 08:29 PM

#137

Howard Beale

Formerly red

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 22,190

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

The Nazis might not have risen to power if it werent for a treaty.

Do go on.

04-04-2013 , 08:49 PM

#138

Turn Prophet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 11,558

Quote:

Originally Posted by There Is A Light

Treaties are the dangerous thing, they are what can cause rapid, irrational escalation. WW1 started because all of Europe had millions of treaties on the go.

Millions, eh? There also hasn't been a major war in Europe for nearly 70 years because of treaties.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

The Nazis might not have risen to power if it werent for a treaty.

This has to be the strangest Godwin scenario ever.

04-04-2013 , 09:15 PM

#139

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,729

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

The Nazis might not have risen to power if it werent for a treaty.

We wouldn't have chemical fertilizers that feed billions without the Nazis. Boom! Checkmate!

04-04-2013 , 11:23 PM

#140

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Quote:

Originally Posted by Howard Beale

Do go on.

Quote:

Of the many provisions in the treaty, one of the most important and controversial required Germany to accept responsibility for causing the war (along with Austria and Hungary, according to the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye and the Treaty of Trianon, respectively) and, under the terms of articles 231–248 (later known as the War Guilt clauses), to disarm, make substantial territorial concessions and pay heavy reparations to certain countries that had formed the Entente powers. In 1921 the total cost of these reparations was assessed at 132 billion Marks (then $31.4 billion or £6.6 billion, roughly equivalent to US $442 billion or UK £284 billion in 2013), a sum that many economists at the time, notably John Maynard Keynes, deemed to be excessive and counterproductive. The argument by Keynes that the terms were too harsh—a "Carthaginian peace"—convinced many British and American leaders, but left the French unmoved.[2]

The result of these competing and sometimes conflicting goals among the victors was a compromise that left none contented: Germany was not pacified or conciliated, nor permanently weakened. This would prove to be a factor leading to World War II.
....

The Versailles Reparations came in a variety of forms, including coal, steel, intellectual property (e.g. the trademark for Aspirin) and agricultural products, in no small part because currency reparations of that order of magnitude would lead to hyperinflation, as actually occurred in post-war Germany (see 1920s German inflation), thus decreasing the benefits to France and Britain.

Reparations due in the form of coal played a big part in punishing Germany. The Treaty of Versailles declared that Germany was responsible for the destruction of coal mines in Northern France, parts of Belgium, and parts of Italy. Therefore, France was awarded full possession of Germany′s coal-bearing Saar basin for a period. Also, Germany was forced to provide France, Belgium, and Italy with millions of tons of coal for 10 years. However, under the control of Adolf Hitler, Germany stopped outstanding deliveries of coal within a few years, thus violating the terms of the Treaty of Versailles
....

French historian Raymond Cartier states that millions of Germans in the Sudetenland and in Posen-West Prussia were placed under foreign rule in a hostile environment, where harassment and violation of rights by authorities are documented.[58] Cartier asserts that, out of 1,058,000 Germans in Posen-West Prussia in 1921, 758,867 fled their homelands within five years due to Polish harassment.[58] In 1926, the Polish Ministry of the Interior estimated the remaining number of Germans at less than 300,000.[citation needed] These sharpening ethnic conflicts would lead to public demands to reattach the annexed territory in 1938 and become a pretext for Hitler′s annexations of Czechoslovakia and parts of Poland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versallies

Quote:

The Nazis were strongly influenced by the post-World War I far-right in Germany, which held common beliefs such as anti-Marxism, anti-liberalism, and antisemitism, along with nationalism, contempt towards the Treaty of Versailles, and condemnnation of the Weimar Republic for signing the armistice in November 1918 that later led to their signing of the Treaty of Versailles
...

Hitler altered his political views in response to the Treaty of Versailles of June 1919, and it was then that he became an antisemitic, German nationalist.[39] As a Nazi, Hitler had expressed opposition to capitalism; he regarded capitalism as having Jewish origins, and accused capitalism of holding nations ransom in the interests of a parasitic cosmopolitan rentier class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi

Quote:

Hitler quickly became the party's most active orator, and he appeared in public as a speaker thirty-one times within the first year after his self-discovery. Hitler always spoke about the same subjects: the Treaty of Versailles and the Jewish question.[43] This deliberate technique and effective publicising of the party contributed significantly to his early success,[43] about which a contemporary poster wrote 'Since Herr Hitler is a brilliant speaker, we can hold out the prospect of an extremely exciting evening'.[45] Over the following months, the DAP continued to attract new members,[38] while remaining too small to have any real significance in German politics.[46] By the end of 1920, the party numbered 3,000,[43] many of whom Hitler and Röhm had brought into the party personally, or for whom Hitler's oratory had been their reason for joining.
...

Germans voted for Hitler primarily because of his promises to revive the economy (by unspecified means), to restore German greatness and overturn the Treaty of Versailles, and to save Germany from communism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party

04-04-2013 , 11:44 PM

#141

Sholar

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,357

Maybe the Germans should have thought about that during WWI. Actions having consequences and all that.

04-05-2013 , 12:02 AM

#142

ikestoys

banned

Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 94,424

Protecting a group of people from enslavement, starvation and mass killings is an honorable thing lirva. gtfooh with your nonsense. The bulwark against North Korea is one of the best things our military does at this point.

04-05-2013 , 12:44 AM

#143

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Quote:

Originally Posted by ikestoys

It is, but we can't be the world police. I'll concede though that I probably need to learn more about the whole situation. That said, why are there no other countries protecting us from our government? The war on drugs is a human rights violation, the suppression of peaceful protest is a human rights violation, the people being held at gitmo are being violated, so why are no other countries stepping in to protect us? Would you support that?

04-05-2013 , 12:49 AM

#144

Shoe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 11,869

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

You should learn more about how the USA government is one of the best governments in the world, and does more for humanity than any other government out there.

04-05-2013 , 12:55 AM

#145

KennyJPowers

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 1,379

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoe

You should learn more about how the USA government is one of the best governments in the world, and does more for humanity than any other government out there.

Im sure your leveling right

04-05-2013 , 01:01 AM

#146

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoe

You should learn more about how the USA government is one of the best governments in the world, and does more for humanity than any other government out there.

04-05-2013 , 01:07 AM

#147

Shoe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 11,869

Quote:

Originally Posted by KennyJPowers

Im sure your leveling right

Name a country that does more for humanity?

04-05-2013 , 01:09 AM

#148

KennyJPowers

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 1,379

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoe

Name a country that does more for humanity?

04-05-2013 , 01:09 AM

#149

LirvA

banned

Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 43,574

Name a country that has put more people in prison for using drugs than the U.S.

04-05-2013 , 01:13 AM

#150

Shoe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 11,869

Quote:

Originally Posted by LirvA

Name a country that has put more people in prison for using drugs than the U.S.

Name a country that has done more for humanity than the U.S. And I'm not watching any youtube videos.

Also if I was going to get busted with drugs, U.S. is probably the in the top 10 countries in the world I would want that to happen in. You really want to go to Thailand jail or something or other countries with much worse drug laws?

Page 6 of 14

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Last

...

Page 6 of 14

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Last