S. Korea Announces Another Drill... This time with Fighter Jets! - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872591] You obviously do not understand the situation. China allows it's people to be exploited in order to bring money into their country. Making lots of money and building a strong industrial base is how you become a superpower.[/QUOTE] China is completely xenophobic. Did you not hear how they are banning western words from appearing on their news? They have no intention of changing. They use the US for an economy but they don't LIKE the US, which is my point. Like how sometimes you don't like your boss but you put it up with it cause the job pays.

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872626] perhaps if you show some kindness and respect[/QUOTE] Respect is to be earned, you ought to figure that out, maybe then people won't call on your surrealistic rants.

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872626]war is in its nature destructive. everything that we've gained from wars so to speak came after such wars [/QUOTE] one more couldnt hurt

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872626]perhaps if you show some kindness and respect instead of attitude and ego i'd be more willing to respond a child shouldn't be surprised when it is treated as a child[/QUOTE] nice deflection. How about you actually refute my post instead of calling me immature? [QUOTE=thisispain;26872611]money from who, north koreans are incredible broke[/QUOTE] No, from the South Korean government who now owns their land.

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872649]how wonderfully irrelevant[/QUOTE] I get it - You were dumb, I made notice of it, you're sulking over it. Just get over it, acting like a seven year old isn't gonna enhance how you got the same outlook on life as one. EDIT: Oh, and, I won't make any more replies, I'm sick of how the moderators constantly misunderstand my criticism as "trolling" just because I'm not some kissy-face whiteknight who's obsessed with shallow third-person judgementalism...

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872655]Respect is to be earned, you ought to figure that out, maybe then people won't call on your surrealistic rants.[/QUOTE] i'm not the person who came into a thread and starting going on about some totally irrelevant subject and respect is mutual

when you win a war you basically make the enemy your bitch and when you make them your bitch, you get married to that bitch and have children and thats why japan makes giant robots

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872641]My point is, all governments has that agenda in mind, even South Korea, some are just bad at brainwashing their people. I mean, look at the US, they're brilliant at the "bandit"-type of agenda, where you find some uncivilized country, wait for them to slip up; walk up to their dead, and just rack 'em and sack 'em. Then look at Sweden for example, they're better as a "host" country, they treat everyone as equals and present themselves as co-operative to any benefactors in order to gain finances, which heightens their status, which gives them influence, which eventually means control. Then look at the middle-east, brilliant at the "martyr"-concept, where you victimize yourself and your people to gain sympathy from the rest of the world whilst having the true evil brewing behind the fancy velvet curtain. Whilst the ultimate goal there is also conquest. No matter where you turn, someone's always willing to stab you in the back for the proper reward, and the only thing keeping it in a balance is how terrified they are of eachother. South Korea is just like the others, one way or another. And that, was my point.[/QUOTE] So you're saying that SK wants to control NK because, by nature, governments are power-hungry controlling entities? Except the first examples you gave don't directly involve sacrificing citizens of the country in question in order to gain power, which will inevitably happen if SK and NK go to war. Every country has it's own way to get power, and every country wants power, but by your logic, borders should basically be fluid and the entire world should always be in a state of war because individual countries want to maximum their influence. Even if the goal is conquest a lot of countries do it through peaceful measures, by doing redundant drills with jets, it just shows that you are waving your dick.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872663]nice deflection. How about you actually refute my post instead of calling me immature?[/QUOTE] there is nothing to gain from war, a destructive concept how else should i put it in either case, calling someone an idiot is not how to start a conversation, don't fault me for thinking your posts are a waste of time [QUOTE=Sector 7;26872663]No, from the South Korean government who now owns their land.[/QUOTE] south korea is capitalistic, money would have to come from the taxpayer having a large population tacked on that are completely incapable of paying taxes does not lend itself to contractors [editline]22nd December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Vinze;26872671] Oh, and, I won't make any more replies, I'm sick of how the moderators constantly misunderstand my criticism as "trolling" just because I'm not some kissy-face whiteknight who's obsessed with shallow third-person judgementalism...[/QUOTE] self-restraint is a virtue

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872705]there is nothing to gain from war, a destructive concept how else should i put it[/QUOTE] How about you read my post where I detail the things that can be gained from war? The one that you responded to but clearly ignored?

[QUOTE=Moose;26872659]one more couldnt hurt[/QUOTE] A war between two nuclear powers is always fun. Right guys? [editline]22nd December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Vinze;26872671] Oh, and, I won't make any more replies, I'm sick of how the moderators constantly misunderstand my criticism as "trolling" just because I'm not some kissy-face whiteknight who's obsessed with shallow third-person judgementalism...[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Vinze;26802709]Your mom is dumb, you ugly son of a bitch... Oh, yeah, and windows rules! [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Trolling" - mahalis))[/highlight][/QUOTE] Isn't exactly the best post in the world, if you think it wasn't deserved maybe you don't belong here.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26872700]So you're saying that SK wants to control NK because, by nature, governments are power-hungry controlling entities? Except the first examples you gave don't directly involve sacrificing citizens of the country in question in order to gain power, which will inevitably happen if SK and NK go to war. Every country has it's own way to get power, and every country wants power, but by your logic, borders should basically be fluid and the entire world should always be in a state of war because individual countries want to maximum their influence. Even if the goal is conquest a lot of countries do it through peaceful measures, by doing redundant drills with jets, it just shows that you are waving your dick.[/QUOTE] I never said it was a good concept, and my original point was a more elaborate thing towards: Countries aren't feeble-minded pacifists. They're cold and analytical, their people is just a resource, much like food or electricity. Measured in it's weight of taxmoney. Since thisispain keeps whining over how leaders have to be making like manipulative megalomaniacs to keep themselves leveled with potential predators.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872718]How about you read my post where I detail the things that can be gained from war? The one that you responded to but clearly ignored?[/QUOTE] detail what [quote]North Korea's people are starving. They are brainwashed. They are led by Stalinist madmen.[/quote] during wartime, people will starve more, they will be brainwashed more, and they will be led into their graves by said madmen the question i originally posed was "what will south korea gain from a [b]war[/b]", i didn't ask what they will gain post-war, i asked what do they gain from such a war instead of asserting something, reason something

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26872720] Isn't exactly the best post in the world, if you think it wasn't deserved maybe you don't belong here.[/QUOTE] I'm trying to change, which is why is stopped that discussion, that very post is why. I realize now that half of the time people like my posts, so, if I get rid of the bad half, then maybe my letters will be orange-yellow-something within a short future.

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872743] Since thisispain keeps whining over how leaders have to be making like manipulative megalomaniacs to keep themselves leveled with potential predators.[/QUOTE] [quote] Oh, and, I won't make any more replies[/quote]

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872743]I never said it was a good concept, and my original point was a more elaborate thing towards: Countries aren't feeble-minded pacifists. They're cold and analytical, their people is just a resource, much like food or electricity. Measured in it's weight of taxmoney. Since thisispain keeps whining over how leaders have to be making like manipulative megalomaniacs to keep themselves leveled with potential predators.[/QUOTE] This is very true, except sometimes a war just destroys the country and the power that came with the conquest takes a long time to come to fruition Seoul has half of SKs population, and it's easily bombable from NK by WWII standards. It's one thing to lose some people, I agree that sometimes it's necessary, it's another to have your biggest city and half your civilians decimated. NK is relatively unstable and will probably fall apart soon anyway, people starving, horrible infrastructure etc. They could attack now, risk getting nuked and have all of Korea, or just wait and have it anyway.

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872755]the question i originally posed was "what will south korea gain from a [b]war[/b]", i didn't ask what they will gain post-war, i asked what do they gain from such a war[/QUOTE] So you're implying that Korea has something to gain "post-war." But you're against the war because they have nothing to gain "during-war." So you're saying "during-war" and "post-war" are unrelated? Because I'm pretty sure you have to have one to have the other. I could be wrong.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26872780]This is very true, except sometimes a war just destroys the country. Seoul has half of SKs population, and it's easily bombable from NK by WWII standards. It's one thing to lose some people, I agree that sometimes it's necessary, it's another to have your biggest city and half your civilians decimated. NK is relatively unstable and will probably fall apart soon anyway, all SK has to do is wait. They could attack now, risk getting nuked and have all of Korea, or just wait and have it anyway.[/QUOTE] True, but then again; maybe South Korea fears that their northern enemies might invade them in desperation, and is therefore looking to start a cold war/standoff whilst waiting for them to crumble. It would explain the display of force and the lack of action.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872790]So you're implying that Korea has something to gain "post-war." But you're against the war because they have nothing to gain "during-war." So you're saying "during-war" and "post-war" are unrelated?[/QUOTE] you are trying to argue that a war will be good because it will all be kittens and roses after it i'm arguing against the war because of the fact that many people will die in a conflict that did not have to happen do you understand this important distinction? i'm not against a unified korea by any means, i'm against a bloody conflict that will only be a reminder of the failure in the korean war

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872804]True, but then again; maybe South Korea fears that their northern enemies might invade them in desperation, and is therefore looking to start a cold war/standoff whilst waiting for them to crumble. It would explain the display of force and the lack of action.[/QUOTE] The US would never allow a NK controlled Korea. If a war started, the US would eventually roll in and blow the North Koreans away. The best the NK can hope for is to have static borders and not get attacked. SK knows this.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26872834]The US would never allow a NK controlled Korea. If a war started, the US would eventually roll in and blow the North Koreans away. The best the NK can hope for is to have static borders and not get attacked. SK knows this.[/QUOTE] I suppose, but it won't hurt to remind them once in a while by drilling some troops. Since, that most likely worries the north due to that it suggests they're preparing for war. Which the last thing they need. I'm just saying, South Korea has several good reasons to flex themselves now.

[QUOTE=Vinze;26872863]I suppose, but it won't hurt to remind them once in a while by drilling some troops. Since, that most likely worries the north due to that it suggests they're preparing for war. Which the last thing they need. I'm just saying, South Korea has several good reasons to flex themselves now.[/QUOTE] [quote]SEOUL — South Korea announced on Wednesday land and sea military exercises including its largest-ever live-fire drill near North Korea in a big show of force just as tension on the peninsula was easing after Pyongyang's attack on a southern island. The land drill, involving artillery, fighter jets and the largest number of personnel in a peace-time exercise, will take place on Thursday, after the South's live-fire artillery exercise on Monday on the island of Yeonpyeong, and is bound to infuriate the North, Reuters news agency reported[/quote] This isn't just a warm-up drill, this is "if you do anything we will fuck you up" SK is being aggressive and that's just escalating the tension.

Kim Jong Un is coming to power soon, so we won't really know for sure what the outcome for NK will be. Younger people tend fuck up more or make positive changes, but the fact that his father was a dictator that brainwashed his people doesn't look too promising on SK's behalf. The way I see it, NK will either- A. Kill shit. B. Unify shit. C. Continue shit until they're broke entirely. - Besides, you don't live in South Korea. You can't even begin to imagine the paranoia they must be feeling right now, and how tense they are, especially with the possibility of deaths at hand.

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872812]you are trying to argue that a war will be good because it will all be kittens and roses after it i'm arguing against the war because of the fact that many people will die in a conflict that did not have to happen[/QUOTE] so your earlier blanket statement [quote]there is nothing to gain from war, a destructive concept[/quote] is untrue at which point it becomes a matter of weighing the pros and cons of another Korean war. Quick history lesson. a. The first Korean war was started by North Korea b. They invaded SK but were pushed back to the border by UN forces c. Further incursions into NK were stopped by masses of Chinese infantry who believed they were fighting on Chinese soil A few things have changed since then. Namely: a. China no longer supports NK militarily b. There is now a 50-year gap in military technology between sides, in SK's favor c. NK is starving and their military is so low on supplies that they can't properly train Therefor, a second Korean war would certainly not be a 'failure,' and by reuniting Korea now we may prevent NK from gaining more advanced nuclear technology, thus avoiding an even greater loss of life - not to mention helping feed North Koreans who are starving as we speak.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872617]jesus you are dumb. I write out a fully-fledged, intelligent response and I get some stupid hippy-buzzword one-liner in return. Responding to the first sentence, no less.[/QUOTE]"People will die" is an understatement. Seoul would be completely levelled. Any other cities within range of NK's (fully-functional short- and medium-range) ballistic missiles would also suffer heavily i.e. all of them. Millions more would die on the frontlines, North Korea having as it does the 4th largest army in the world. Yes, they're not up-to-date, but infantry is infantry. 1 million active personnel, to be precise. While I have often said NK's nukes are equivalent to the US nuclear arsenal in 1945 i.e. requiring at least air parity (which they don't have) in order to have any chance of dropping them, there is every possibility that NK will use them, on Kim Jong-il or un's whim, on their own territory in the face of potential defeat. Or, perhaps carting them off by land to the frontline, to be used in a manner reminiscent of Blue Peacock.

this is M.A.D. applied to a smaller scale. Both sides are aware of this.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;26872897]so your earlier blanket statement is untrue[/QUOTE] uh no it isn't

[img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_0O2CPGcOPk0/Sc309Rk6Z3I/AAAAAAAADzk/vno9k5g2k1Q/s400/North+Korean+Missile.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=thisispain;26872950]uh no it isn't[/QUOTE] I disagree, you can gain from war (ie land, oil, technology), but the losses and gains are incomparable, so it's impossible to know the true cost of the gains.

[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;26872886]This isn't just a warm-up drill, this is "if you do anything we will fuck you up" SK is being aggressive and that's just escalating the tension.[/QUOTE] Yeah, my point exactly... Just not as narrowed-down...