| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
farvacola
United States18839 Posts
On April 12 2013 10:36 wptlzkwjd wrote: Most of Asia have beef with Japan due to wars in the last century. Haha, I'm not sure I've ever seen it put quite so succinctly, but it is indeed the case. Based on my admittedly limited knowledge in the area, it seems like Japan enjoys irking its neighbors every so often in history. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On April 12 2013 08:23 unkkz wrote: Why do they want to invade Japan, could anyone enlighten me? Like what's their beef with Japan? Japan isn't particularly loved by their neighbors due to former imperialism, World War Two, and subsequent whitewashing. They're getting better about it as time goes by, but they certainly didn't pull a Germany. | ||
|
Tennoji
78 Posts
On April 12 2013 09:21 white_horse wrote: Dude. How am I jumping to conclusions when I just stated a fact about the way communism works. Not only is it a problem when there is nothing to distribute to all the members of society, communism essentially works in the complete opposite of a market economy, which means the government controls literally every aspect of the economy. Meaning they are trying to control the demand and supply of everything, from things like determining how many people they should allow to study electrical engineering in college to how many tons of bananas they should import into the country in a particular year. This is basically impossible to do, considering the millions of goods and services that circulate in a regular economy in any given year. With modern technology it seems a lot more feasible than before. People could indicate what they want on a day-to-day basis on some state-wide IT platform, everything costing some credits. The IT platform sends this information to the people in charge of delivery, maybe not everyone will get what they want each day, but the system could make a fair compromise over who gets his bananas which day. Everyone would get equal credits daily (maybe depending on their activity status, no job = less credits, higher workload = slightly more credits). There are numerous ways of giving incentive to work (hard), without becoming a capitalist state. You could give incentive to work in different kinds of jobs by providing more credit for the jobs in high demand. There is not much sense for me to go into any details of such a system, this is a mere example of what I can come up with in 5 minutes just to show that not everything has been tried. I don't think it has been proven to be impossible simply because it has never been tried (certainly not with current day technology). Please think outside the box and don't cling to the tried concepts of communism, there are probably plenty of ways to fix the problems you see. I also realize such a system might seem awfully close to capitalism, I assure you it would not be, as there would not be grossly-over-payed people and no businesses with all different kinds of agenda. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On April 12 2013 09:21 white_horse wrote: Dude. How am I jumping to conclusions when I just stated a fact about the way communism works. Not only is it a problem when there is nothing to distribute to all the members of society, communism essentially works in the complete opposite of a market economy, which means the government controls literally every aspect of the economy. Meaning they are trying to control the demand and supply of everything, from things like determining how many people they should allow to study electrical engineering in college to how many tons of bananas they should import into the country in a particular year. This is basically impossible to do, considering the millions of goods and services that circulate in a regular economy in any given year. It's impossible in the same way that a democratic system was impossible before the United States succeeded at it: not at all. Just because it was not implemented successfully doesn't mean it never can be. Every economic system is flawed, and communism is no exception. The communist countries so far have suffered from much more deeply-rooted problems than an inefficient economic system. Being isolated from the rest of the world by superstition, for instance, is one such reason. | ||
|
Adel
Belgium86 Posts
On April 12 2013 10:22 govie wrote: China does not want the US to have influence so close to there borders. China will never let the US attack NK or gain more influence in that territory. SK is bad enough ellready (in china's diplomatic and militairy defensive perspective). This is high stakes poker, on a level we normal people dont understand. US will never invade NK. and NK will never attack SK, because then china will annex NK so there defence isnt weakend. Do u really think the US would risk a war with russia and china over the subject NK, dont think so. It's more like China won't risk a war against the USA over NK. You said it yourself. They already have all the bases they can dream of in SK, the only thing NK would give them is a small border w/ China allowing for a possible (though highly unlikely) invasion. China won't invade NK because it will NOT benefit them to do so (they already have enough people in their country don't they, any more would be excessive, moreso if they're starving people they have to feed while already having trouble feeding their own population... cf. China preparing for the future by buying huge terrain in Africa). They would only say "we aren't happy with what you're doing" to the USA, but noone, NOONE can win a war against the USA. Right now, anyone waging a war against the USA, China or Russia would get wiped out (and if they fight each other, it will be mutual annihilation). The US & Russia have in excess of 2000 nukes than can probably be readied for war in a matter of hours, and China have them in hundreds. As the Japanese will testify, the USA will not hesitate to use them, so, again, attacking them is madness. So no, China & Russia won't do a damn thing if the US attack NK. Besides, they won't. The only thing they'll do is protect SK's soil and give them full air and naval support, and should SK decide to invade NK, I doubt we'd see any American soldier fighting on North Korean ground. They simply have no reason to lose soldiers over this if SK is willing to lose theirs. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
step 1) state nkorea has missiles with nuclear warhead step 2) demonize kju regime step 3) ??? step 4) war will they(world) label nkorea as a nuclear weapon state (NWS) and move on like nk wants or forcibly remove them? | ||
|
govie
9334 Posts
On April 12 2013 11:45 Adel wrote: It's more like China won't risk a war against the USA over NK. You said it yourself. They already have all the bases they can dream of in SK, the only thing NK would give them is a small border w/ China allowing for a possible (though highly unlikely) invasion. China won't invade NK because it will NOT benefit them to do so (they already have enough people in their country don't they, any more would be excessive, moreso if they're starving people they have to feed while already having trouble feeding their own population... cf. China preparing for the future by buying huge terrain in Africa). They would only say "we aren't happy with what you're doing" to the USA, but noone, NOONE can win a war against the USA. Right now, anyone waging a war against the USA, China or Russia would get wiped out (and if they fight each other, it will be mutual annihilation). The US & Russia have in excess of 2000 nukes than can probably be readied for war in a matter of hours, and China have them in hundreds. As the Japanese will testify, the USA will not hesitate to use them, so, again, attacking them is madness. So no, China & Russia won't do a damn thing if the US attack NK. Besides, they won't. The only thing they'll do is protect SK's soil and give them full air and naval support, and should SK decide to invade NK, I doubt we'd see any American soldier fighting on North Korean ground. They simply have no reason to lose soldiers over this if SK is willing to lose theirs. Point is that china will not let the US increase there presence in there region, like NK. US are overplaying there cards, china doesnt care what US says or does, so long as US doesnt increase there presence in the regions surrounding china. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On April 12 2013 11:54 govie wrote: Point is that china will not let the US increase there presence in there region, like NK. US are overplaying there cards, china doesnt care what US says or does, so long as US doesnt increase there presence in the regions surrounding china. US and China will not go to war. Both are far too economically dependent on one another. War would be catastrophic for both. The people who hold power in both countries - the rich - will stop it. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On April 12 2013 11:54 govie wrote: Point is that china will not let the US increase there presence in there region, like NK. US are overplaying there cards, china doesnt care what US says or does, so long as US doesnt increase there presence in the regions surrounding china. See, that was the case just a few years ago. But between the artillery strikes, random attacks on Chinese fishermen, and the missile testing over the last 3 years, China has really gotten sick of NK to the point that they're almost willing to let it happen. If some arrangement were to be made that minimized the effect of US presence so close to the Chinese border, China is at the point that they might be willing to turn a blind eye. | ||
|
Adel
Belgium86 Posts
On April 12 2013 11:53 jinorazi wrote: so, what happens if nkorea does have nuke missile? step 1) state nkorea has missiles with nuclear warhead step 2) demonize kju regime step 3) ??? step 4) war will they(world) label nkorea as a nuclear weapon state (NWS) and move on like nk wants or forcibly remove them? They'll do the same thing they did with Pakistan. State they have nukes, give up their hopes on making them forget about nuclear weapons and move on. They can't "forcibly remove them", because if NK were to nuke Seoul and Tokyo, I doubt the USA would enjoy that, and the risks in attacking a NWS are just waaaay too high. On April 12 2013 11:54 govie wrote: Point is that china will not let the US increase there presence in there region, like NK. US are overplaying there cards, china doesnt care what US says or does, so long as US doesnt increase there presence in the regions surrounding china. Yeah, so? What do you think China would do, if the USA were to increase their military presence in the region? | ||
|
ninini
Sweden1204 Posts
On April 12 2013 05:41 HunterX11 wrote: Uh, yeah, the US and USSR were both constantly coercing client states into capitalism/communism in a series of coups and proxy wars. That's kind of the whole "Cold War" thing, and yes, the US won. While it is true that Gorbachev just sort of destroyed the USSR without being forced to, it could just as easily have continued on had he not "surrendered", but in terms of the Third World, the US and France, despite a few notable failures such as Vietnam and Cuba, for the most part managed to destroy the ability of sovereign governments to become Communist or even socialist, especially in Africa and the Americas. Mossadegh, Allende, Sankara, Guzman, Arbenz, Goulart, etc. were all very much defeated rather than collapsing. You can't compare capitalism with communism. Capitalism basically means free market, and the opposite of that is state-planning, which is one of the foundations of socialism, which in turn is one of the foundations of communism. Communism is a oppressive and extreme form of a socialist government, while capitalism is a fairly neutral term. You could define USA/USSR cold war foreign policies as communism vs anti-communism. The americans claimed that anti-communism and freedom was the same thing, and this claim makes sense, but it isn't true in all cases. This was the main flaw in USA's actions during the cold war, very often, their alternative wasn't that great either, but atleast they gave ppl a chance. Communism is much more stable than ordinary authoritarian regimes, like Rhee's South Korea. This is the reason why South Korea had a number of successful coups, as opposed to North Korea who have remained stable since day 1. If the ppl really detest a dictator, they can usually do something about it, but if they're fighting communism, it's really hard, because communism in essence is designed to control everybody, especially troublemakers. Also, you're totally wrong in your claim that Gorbachev could have carried on with the USSR. Their system was just not sustainable, and he realized that. He's a hero whose actions lead to the liberation of half of Europe. Do you really believe that the rest of the party would go along with his drastic reforms if they really had a chance to survive without them? The Russians don't like him because he crushed their fairytale and they won't face up to the fact that they never was as great as USA to begin with. It was all a lie. The USSR had overinvested in research, space exploration, weapons, the army and sports, pretty much anything that made them look good. If you look at state-sponsored videos about North Korea, it's always the same thing. Look at us, look at what we can do, and how good we are. It's just propaganda. This is what communism is about. You maintain a nice healthy-looking front, to convince your own ppl that you're doing well, and you keep all the dirt hidden. Don't forget that to a large extent, USSR was run by slave labour in the gulags. These ppl were working every waking hour for no pay and with minimal food. Also don't forget that despite this, the living standards were remarkably low for the ordinary citizens. There were no money left to invest in constructing new houses, or even repairing the old ones. Just compare West Germany with East Germany. East Germany had stagnated, because their system wasn't sustainable. China is a more recent example of the failure of communism. Look how much they've grown now that they've abandoned communism in economic terms. Communism is a failure. It never worked and it never will and it's so oppressive and freedom restricting that even if it worked, it wouldn't be worth it. If you're looking for the workers paradise, move to Norway. In this day and age, that's the best place on earth for ppl who aim for a modest low or middle class life. | ||
|
govie
9334 Posts
On April 12 2013 12:08 LegalLord wrote: See, that was the case just a few years ago. But between the artillery strikes, random attacks on Chinese fishermen, and the missile testing over the last 3 years, China has really gotten sick of NK to the point that they're almost willing to let it happen. If some arrangement were to be made that minimized the effect of US presence so close to the Chinese border, China is at the point that they might be willing to turn a blind eye. I dont believe that to happen. Yes, china can vomit over NK-propaganda, but there long term goals are way more important. they are not stupid, They will never let the US increase there influence in the surrounding regions. US isnt what it was anymore, they are broke (china is there biggest creditor). US only consume nowadays and doesnt produce much of its own. The henri fords and other big imperiums are gone. We all know china, india, south america and oil producing countries will become the dominant regions in the future. US will not even fund military operations at this moment, as the people dont support war in a far away country because this will mean more taxation. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
Yeah, so? What do you think China would do, if the USA were to increase their military presence in the region? Probably cause trouble for the US somewhere else. Give supplies to Iran or NK maybe? They wouldn't fight, but they certainly have a strong influence on world politics if they need to use it. | ||
|
govie
9334 Posts
On April 12 2013 12:18 Adel wrote: They'll do the same thing they did with Pakistan. State they have nukes, give up their hopes on making them forget about nuclear weapons and move on. They can't "forcibly remove them", because if NK were to nuke Seoul and Tokyo, I doubt the USA would enjoy that, and the risks in attacking a NWS are just waaaay too high. Yeah, so? What do you think China would do, if the USA were to increase their military presence in the region? They cant really because they do not have money, US only consumes and doesnt produce. Dont forget US has forced bugetshrinking over every department, because of the The Budget Control Act of 2011. Ive heard maintanance of armyproperty (aircraftcarriers etc) is likely not gonna happen, because there simply is no money. Do u really think the US is gonna do anything, i dont! The US and EU look nice and dandy like a ferrari, but we all know there engine (eco, politics and debt) is broke. U cant drive a car with a broken engine. U cant do 11/11 against Z, when u dont have money for the bunker  | ||
|
ETisME
12525 Posts
On April 12 2013 10:43 acker wrote: Japan isn't particularly loved by their neighbors due to former imperialism, World War Two, and subsequent whitewashing. They're getting better about it as time goes by, but they certainly didn't pull a Germany. not only that, japan is like a proxy country for the US in the asia region. Their politics decisions etc are heavily influenced by the US, more than any other asia countries. it's also well known that despite a lot of hatred from its own citizens against the US miliary bases in Japan, the government is not reacting in order to please the US. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On April 12 2013 13:21 ETisME wrote: not only that, japan is like a proxy country for the US in the asia region. Their politics decisions etc are heavily influenced by the US, more than any other asia countries. it's also well known that despite a lot of hatred from its own citizens against the US miliary bases in Japan, the government is not reacting in order to please the US. Yes the main reason Japan is still disliked in the region is mainly due to the US protectorate. Germany was disarmed then split in two by german neighbours (west europe and USSR) and then time did its work to ease europe into re-accepting germany. On the other hand, after the war, Japan became almost US territory and the US isnt (its a bit better now though) liked in the region (2 wars, a communist China and a communist NK). This did not help the neighbours of Japan to forget WW2 like Europe did with Germany. I also believe (someone can confirm ?) that Germans have been quite apologetic post-WW2 while Japan... meh not so much regarding other asian countries. And the reason again may be because of the US ending the war in Pacific but not being linked to the very people that really suffered from Japan. The same thing may have happened if Germany had been completly taken over by the USSR; Germany would have been less forgiven by the west probably. Of course I'm no expert so if you have a better explanation go ahead | ||
micronesia
United States24741 Posts
How long until this North Korean ridiculousness simmers down? | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
First, communism. The ideas behind communism do work, but have various constraints that cause them to fail. Communism is meant to come about as the ability to produce becomes so cheap that it's harder to find somebody meaningful work than it is to provide for them. Imagine a factory where every car is made by robots and a team of 1 dozen engineers, while the resources and parts are made in the same fashion as the car, with limited labor. At some point, it's stupid to hire enough workers to complete a job, but if most of the population becomes unemployed in this way, nobody can "afford" the products that can be made. At that time, it makes more sense just to give out materials based on the need instead of requiring some useless labor that outputs nothing more to the economy, and there is never an "actual" shortage should demand for a product rise due to the abundance of resources and production. Next, China and America. China cares about America putting stuff on its porch, but many of you overstate that concern. China doesn't have the same relationship with America as Russia. China doesn't throw a fit about missile defense systems being deployed on their quarter of the world, but they have reasonable concerns about unprovoked deployment. How NK is acting right now counts as "provoking," and that's extremely obvious. It's not covert operations under the guise of scientific development, it's outright threats and starting up actions that they've been punished for before, while admittedly defying international pressure. At some point, a rogue nation can cross out of the dichotomy of international politics, to a position where nobody likes them, not even the enemies of their enemy. China isn't going to wave a stick at America any time soon, and no good would come of it on either side. It's a waste of resources and diplomatic focus for either side to issue threats or feel uneasy about the other's actions at this point. As for the strength of the U.S. economy and their reliance on Chinese funding, it's largely bullshit. They're down to about 6% of treasury holdings, and that's the country as a whole. We're not talking about the Chinese government specifically, but Chinese citizens and investors. Even if the Chinese were to decide unilaterally to liquidate their U.S. holdings, it's highly doubtful that it would cause any sort of mid to long term rise in rates on U.S. debt, simply because of the state of the U.S. and world economy. Also, the U.S. DOES produce quite a bit. GDP isn't some ridiculous measure of wealth, but the output of the entire nation over 1 year. Does the U.S. produce a lot of blenders and DVD cases compared to China? No, but they produce a great deal of high-tech equipment and designs, things that require high skillsets to do. Of course, there are always domestically consumed products as well, like houses, medical care, energy, and so on. The U.S. is still a production powerhouse, except it has had a higher desire to consume in the past few decades, thus the trade deficit. | ||
|
ETisME
12525 Posts
On April 12 2013 13:38 rezoacken wrote: Yes the main reason Japan is still disliked in the region is mainly due to the US protectorate. Germany was disarmed then split in two by german neighbours (west europe and USSR) and then time did its work to ease europe into re-accepting germany. On the other hand, after the war, Japan became almost US territory and the US isnt (its a bit better now though) liked in the region (2 wars, a communist China and a communist NK). This did not help the neighbours of Japan to forget WW2 like Europe did with Germany. I also believe (someone can confirm ?) that Germans have been quite apologetic post-WW2 while Japan... meh not so much regarding other asian countries. And the reason again may be because of the US ending the war in Pacific but not being linked to the very people that really suffered from Japan. The same thing may have happened if Germany had been completly taken over by the USSR; Germany would have been less forgiven by the west probably. Of course I'm no expert so if you have a better explanation go ahead Japan had appologised a few times (subtly) yet they consistently annoy us by other means. one recent one was the current PM of Japan said he thinks the crime committed by the japan imperial army was overstated. he also support removing the use of comfortwoman during WW2 from textbook because of "lack of proof" and he had stated clearly that he wouldn't appologise for comfortwoman issue anymore It's not just him though, a lot of the japanese had been taught this way. For example, quite a number of japanese believe that the comfortwoman were women who trade sex for money. that and consistently visiting the shrine despite other countries said it will damage their relationship and also the island dispute making the area unstable is also considered heavily responsibile on Japan (from China, Taiwan and hong kong prespecitve at least) It's quite well known that it is not by chance that he got into PM despite his aggressive (not that popular among japan either actually) policies. All these moves are to promote unstability in Asia region, thus letting US to have some say and get more reasons to go there to interfernee. So to say Japan is just a proxy country for US is not baseless | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
ChoboTeamLeague
WardiTV Korean Royale
BSL: GosuLeague
The PondCast
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Reynor
Maru vs SHIN
MaxPax vs TriGGeR
BSL: GosuLeague
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
"
