EPTN. Korea Vs S. Korea - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
NoName
United States1558 Posts
| ||
|
Anal_Ripper
Russian Federation1233 Posts
On January 30 2003 22:21 Hades wrote: Ummm... NoName -- China and Russia were against the war in Yugoslovia, and even walked out of UN meetings discussing the conflict in disgust saying that they arent being allowed to defend themselves. They are against the war in Iraq as well. China and Russia dont really have the sway you think they have, because they know, that if they go to war against the USA they will be destroyed, without resorting to nuclear tactics (in which case the world would be destroyed) hm I don't see a way USA can destroy russia+china without being destroyed itself. | ||
|
Hades
Canada927 Posts
US Military Budget 2003 - 396.1 Billion dollars Russian Military Budget - 60 Billion China Military Spending - 42 Billion http://www.cdi.org/adm/1240/transcript.html -- very good transcript about threats to the USA... Browse down to North Korea -- it is very interesting because it was written during the Clinton administration when they said they wouldnt build nukes. | ||
|
juhhA
United States295 Posts
| ||
|
Tassadar
United States45 Posts
Tassadar: Its not the people its the government. That much is clear and every American knows that. A lot of the people do support their government but we still dont consider them the enemy. People with different opinions from yours arent automatically stupid and uneducated. Get past that and realize people can see the same facts and draw different conclusions. Sometimes it falls inline with what the media is publishing and sometimes it doesnt. There is a lot of different opinions over here on whats going on. But in the end, the world does mostly judge based on what the government does. I actually havent spent time learning about the Korean situation since its mostly Iraq that is my main concern at the moment. The little I know is: 1. Korean war never formally ended. The firing just stopped. 2. Heavily defended borders on both sides. 3. N.Korea continued a nuclear program after agreeing not to. 4. Test missles fired by N.Korea have flown over Japan. 5. N.Korea recently sold missles to Yemen. 6. N.Korea population is very oppressed. 7. S.Korea is showing they are tired of the US presence after some civilians were run over and killed (accident). That's all I can remember off the top of my head and I dont pay too much attention to this situation yet. Most of my thoughts are based off that limited exposure. From what I've read, I think its more likely N.Korea wants nukes as a power status regardless of whether they fear a US invasion/attack. "Tactical nuke" doesnt make much sense to me. Why would you detonate a nuclear weapon in your own country? I want to ask you Hurtn after all you have heard from mensrea which who lives in korea unlike you I would much rethier depend on what he says then nbc...and what bussiness is it of our's? I mean really how would you like it if someone came in your house and started telling you how to raise your children because they didnt think it was good enough. | ||
|
Tassadar
United States45 Posts
well thx for noticing I spell poorley I am dislexic why you care I dont know?why dont you go insult someone else like a good russian? | ||
|
juhhA
United States295 Posts
 | ||
|
Zaphod
Australia192 Posts
do u welcome american military involvment in the defense of your current against possible attack from the north koreans???? | ||
|
HurtnTime
United States296 Posts
| ||
Klogon
MURICA15980 Posts
On January 31 2003 01:16 Zaphod wrote: a question to all south koreans out there do u welcome american military involvment in the defense of your current against possible attack from the north koreans???? Possible attack form N. Korea? Like mensrea has brilliently said before, it is more unlikly than likey. If N. Korea attacks S. Korea, BOTH SIDES WOULD BE CRUSHED. Both sides would be in a worse position than right now. Heck, if S. Korea blitzed North, we'd win and vis versa. Think about it this way. (pretend you are the north in this analogy). You have 1,000,000 cows/bulls for cattle. The Southern guy has 6,000,000. Although you have more, his cows/bulls are way stronger and healthier. So he gets about 180% more power than you do for every cow. Then you attack the Southern guy's bulls just because. In the end, you'll both have like NO BULLS/COWS. So... using logic, it's complete idiocy to attack. Any war on the Korean peninsula is suicide for both nations. Ok, now really getting to the point. The reason S. Korea doesn't want the USA (Bush) to get into this thing is because they are provoking N. Korea. It's making N. Korea more aggressive than they would be if Bush didn't do anything. About the US troops in Korea, they could help, but S. Korea will hold it's own vs N. Korea without a doubt. Although I'm not saying they should pull out, I'm just trying to say to the fools who won't listen: stop being stupid, the US troops in S. Korea aren't the ultimate protection and that is not the reason N. Korea is not attacking the South. The real reason for not attacking is that they have no way to win with reasonable losses. But if they do attack, I'd welcome any help. A blitz attack of any kind without real reasons for war is total bs. | ||
|
NoName
United States1558 Posts
And the US may have worn out its welcome. Principles or not, all countries ultimately act out of self-interest. I'm sure in the past, especially with the cold-war, the SK where very happy to host the US. Now, they may be starting to think the US presence there is not so beneficial. | ||
|
Tassadar
United States45 Posts
| ||
|
juhhA
United States295 Posts
 of all reporters (not of BW, Wax is great too but of these Foriegn afaris  or what ever you want to call them) | ||
|
Tassadar
United States45 Posts
| ||
|
Maynard
United States889 Posts
| ||
|
DReaMe
United States337 Posts
South Korea has an army of 200/200 vultures, to north koreas army of 40/40 marines. G_G | ||
|
Klogon
MURICA15980 Posts
On January 31 2003 01:48 juhhA wrote: Klogon thats not nessearily true, take this for example: lets say in a game Terran vs Zerg. Zerg units are weaker than Terran units right? but they can easily out number.so if a Zerg out numbers the terran the terran would still win because its units are stronger? Same thing could happen If there was a blitz attack on S.korea. N.Korea is supposevly to have the 3rd biggest military in the world, over 1 million troops.. what if the North totally overwhelmed the south in surrender? probably wouldn't happen and i have nothing againt S.Korea ( but I dont care for N.korea for starting this stuff and other conflicts) just another theory out there.. might be a little un-realistic but still! and BTW Mensrea = of all reporters (not of BW, Wax is great too but of these Foriegn afaris or what ever you want to call them)Yes the zerg vs terran works in the game but in reality that is like comparing knights on horses vs men in tanks. (zergings vs tanks). Number's don't always win. Although I'll admit the knighs vs tanks example is way too exagerated because both sides have big guns. I'm not a guy that's big on military but the North would have a hard time "invading" S. Korea. Thousands of mines on the DZ along with constant satilite "scans", it'd be hard to do a ground attack. N. Korea could just shell S. Korea into submission, but that's only assuming that S. Korea wouldn't fight back. But the south will fight back hard. Yeah, Bush says he's not gonna attack N. Korea and that's a good thing. I'm confident this thing will be solved soon. And yeah noname, you're right. Almost every nation looks out for themselves first. Hell, that's human instincts. That's why it's understandable from my perspective when USA does things for their own intrest because other would do it too if in the same position. But then there are exceptions..... but i'm not gonna get into that. | ||
|
juhhA
United States295 Posts
| ||
|
NoName
United States1558 Posts
US military technology is just eons ahead of stuff from even 20-30 years behind (which Iraq used to have in Desert Storm.) And the US sells this same tech to all it's allies. I was slightly surprised to hear an online friend flies F-16's for Norway. It would be like 100 Reavers vs 100 Marines. It could even be as bad as lings vs battle cruisers. | ||
|
RowdyBob
Australia206 Posts
On January 31 2003 01:48 juhhA wrote: Klogon thats not nessearily true, take this for example: lets say in a game Terran vs Zerg. Zerg units are weaker than Terran units right? but they can easily out number.so if a Zerg out numbers the terran the terran would still win because its units are stronger? Same thing could happen If there was a blitz attack on S.korea. N.Korea is supposevly to have the 3rd biggest military in the world, over 1 million troops.. what if the North totally overwhelmed the south in surrender? probably wouldn't happen and i have nothing againt S.Korea ( but I dont care for N.korea for starting this stuff and other conflicts) just another theory out there.. might be a little un-realistic but still! and BTW Mensrea = of all reporters (not of BW, Wax is great too but of these Foriegn afaris or what ever you want to call them)BW is balanced. World Politics is not. :7 | ||
| ||
