|
On November 23 2010 18:27 theuser wrote:
Hmm..the idea of WW3 is not so weird anymore. think about it: What if China will help North Korea, both being communist states, and US will help SK? a war between communism and capitalism again?
Time have changed and the world isn't red or blue. China has integrated themselves as a leader of the international community. They are up there with US. They want peace.
|
On November 23 2010 18:26 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
God I hope no one important follows that twitter (livenewswire)... and what if someone at BBC starts retweeting it if they don't have Korean speakers watching MBC constantly like Team Liquid does? BBC is already retweeting other random people... I wonder if it is secretly run by a government or is run by some internet prankster trying to cause a war? Surely some people are going to retweet those tweets and cause a problem somewhere.
the day that a war starts over false tweets instead of hard intel, the world ends
I would need to have a lot of convincing evidence laid out in front of me for me to give a go ahead on any kind of military action, these guys have tons of hoops to pass through to get anything real started.
Also, the korean government is not in the stone age, I'm pretty sure South Korea has real time images of major troop movements/fleets/etc at all times
|
United States4053 Posts
On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed
May he rest in peace as well 
|
On November 23 2010 18:26 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:30 Bshad wrote:On November 23 2010 17:24 mustaju wrote:On November 23 2010 17:22 Gummy wrote:On November 23 2010 17:21 Bshad wrote:
So far it looks like the only country that would benefit from this conflict is US. God Bless America? :\ Yes, because it's military forces are not already spread out, and because war is so popular there. Really, everyone actually loses. My condolences to the people afraid for their lives in Korea right now. Nah actually if the war starts China will have to divert a lot resources towards defend from possible invasion from US. So China will surely wont be as much of economical superpower as it is now. US wins. On the other hand mobilizing troops and carrying out military operations cost money. The US economy is already a mess from having to fight two wars. A third was would probably throw us into another Great Depression... Not that we would even have the manpower available to allocate into such an effort. Our forces are spread far too thin.
That is ridiculous. The United States has demonstrated a willingness to stretch its debts very far in order to wage whatever wars she feels appropriate in the past. Some of the casus belli for those wars have turned out to be highly questionable, but the money was never considered when the declarations were made.
I have no doubt that if the United States felt that her interests in the Korean Peninsula were clearly and presently threatened, there would be an immediate response and a full declaration of war. As of now, there is nothing resembling a clear and present threat - but if more bombs fall, that could change really fast.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed
Source?
|
I'm just curious in China's response. On one hand NK is becoming rather rabid and out of control but on the other hand if they let NK get wiped out then no doubt after the US is done "liberating" them then theres going to be bases everywhere near their border. It's quite a dilemma, but lets just hope it never gets to that stage.
|
5003 Posts
On November 23 2010 18:31 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed Source?
MBC
On November 23 2010 18:32 Spidinko wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed Did he die from his injuries or was not accounted for? Or was there a new exchange of fire?
Did not quite hear it, but it's likely from his injuries since i haven't heard of any new exchange of fire (and it'd have been a much bigger deal)
|
On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed
Did he die from his injuries or was not accounted for? Or was there a new exchange of fire?
|
yes MBC , another marine is dead.
|
so i suppose that the situation have stabilised now?
|
u gotta skate8152 Posts
On November 23 2010 18:31 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed Source?
BBC News channel through MBC.
|
On November 23 2010 18:26 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 17:30 Bshad wrote:On November 23 2010 17:24 mustaju wrote:On November 23 2010 17:22 Gummy wrote:On November 23 2010 17:21 Bshad wrote:
So far it looks like the only country that would benefit from this conflict is US. God Bless America? :\ Yes, because it's military forces are not already spread out, and because war is so popular there. Really, everyone actually loses. My condolences to the people afraid for their lives in Korea right now. Nah actually if the war starts China will have to divert a lot resources towards defend from possible invasion from US. So China will surely wont be as much of economical superpower as it is now. US wins. On the other hand mobilizing troops and carrying out military operations cost money. The US economy is already a mess from having to fight two wars. A third was would probably throw us into another Great Depression... Not that we would even have the manpower available to allocate into such an effort. Our forces are spread far too thin.
We're already in the middle of the Greatest Depression without an end in sight
|
On November 23 2010 18:31 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:30 Milkis wrote:
Another marine has confirmed to have been killed Source?
they are from korea they are watching news and updating here. they are the source.
|
On November 23 2010 18:32 Shizuru~ wrote:
so i suppose that the situation have stabilised now?
Guess it all depends on N. Korea and their further actions
|
Yeah another marine dead according to few korean news websites
|
On November 23 2010 18:24 DarthXX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:20 GotterdamerunG wrote:On November 23 2010 18:18 VorcePA wrote:On November 23 2010 18:13 CNugent wrote:
The numbers of US army in SK is just meaningless. They are more like a symbol that the US will help SK if they are attacked. 50,000 US troops means a lot more than troops from anywhere else. The technology and training of a US soldier is superior to most other countries. The UK is probably their only real competitor. yeah please turn this thread into "which country's soldier is the best" thread I'm reasonably certain its a fairly commonly accepted view that Israel's soldiers are the best of any military in the world. While most of their gear is supplied by the US, they have (at least on a per soldier basis) the most combat experience due to constant clashes in the middle east. Correct me if I'm mistaken.
Part of it is also the doctrine that governs their chain of command. Israeli soldiers are actively encouraged to ask questions and understand the missions they are being assigned. This makes every man well informed, aware, and constantly thinking critically about his immediate situation, a potent combination on the modern battlefield.
|
|
|
|
|
On November 23 2010 18:25 DystopiaX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:24 DarthXX wrote:On November 23 2010 18:20 GotterdamerunG wrote:On November 23 2010 18:18 VorcePA wrote:On November 23 2010 18:13 CNugent wrote:
The numbers of US army in SK is just meaningless. They are more like a symbol that the US will help SK if they are attacked. 50,000 US troops means a lot more than troops from anywhere else. The technology and training of a US soldier is superior to most other countries. The UK is probably their only real competitor. yeah please turn this thread into "which country's soldier is the best" thread I'm reasonably certain its a fairly commonly accepted view that Israel's soldiers are the best of any military in the world. While most of their gear is supplied by the US, they have (at least on a per soldier basis) the most combat experience due to constant clashes in the middle east. Correct me if I'm mistaken. Comparing qualities of soldiers is dumb; there's no good way to do it.
Not comparing the qualities of soldiers seems even worse to me. To even suggest 1 NK soldier could compare to 1 US soldier is utterly ridiculous. Pure manpower means less in today's age than ever before.
|
On November 23 2010 18:32 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2010 18:26 LegendaryZ wrote:On November 23 2010 17:30 Bshad wrote:On November 23 2010 17:24 mustaju wrote:On November 23 2010 17:22 Gummy wrote:On November 23 2010 17:21 Bshad wrote:
So far it looks like the only country that would benefit from this conflict is US. God Bless America? :\ Yes, because it's military forces are not already spread out, and because war is so popular there. Really, everyone actually loses. My condolences to the people afraid for their lives in Korea right now. Nah actually if the war starts China will have to divert a lot resources towards defend from possible invasion from US. So China will surely wont be as much of economical superpower as it is now. US wins. On the other hand mobilizing troops and carrying out military operations cost money. The US economy is already a mess from having to fight two wars. A third was would probably throw us into another Great Depression... Not that we would even have the manpower available to allocate into such an effort. Our forces are spread far too thin. We're already in the middle of the Greatest Depression without an end in sight
Uh, hate to say it, but the Great Depression is far worse than the current recession.
Also, the recession wasn't caused by the iraq/afghan wars (though, i will accept the argument that it didn't help the current situation)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
