Something You May Not Know About N. Korea.

[J746NEW]

Originally Posted by ChrisC

But do we now occupy and control Japan? Germany or any of the Axis powers? Spain? France? England? Canada? Mexico? Italy? The answer is no, no, no, no, no, no, no, and no. So where do you come off with this evil empire crap? If we were an evil empire we'd directly control the entire world by now.

We control the world through fiat currency.
You do not need to own the land or occupy it since the whole reason behind that is to collect taxes from the locals, no need to do that when we own the bank and print at will


After North Korea is decimated, Crony contracts will be created and corporations will move in to North Korea to extract the resources there. Look at Haliburton in Iraq and the billions spent there

[Clarallel]

Originally Posted by Scrat335

Its complex. Suffice to say most Americans are ignorant sheep and some just like to see the world burn so long as they don't have to pick up a gun and put their butts in a trench.

America glorafies the culture of war. As a people we're backward in ways.

While I think you're correct, that most people don't want to themselves go to war, that's not what bothers me. What bothers me is that most people don't even want to read a complex analytical economic/political article or watch a serious news program.

[Scrat335]

Originally Posted by rstevens62

Whats strange to me, over in North Korea, most people view americans as evil people who kill and eat babies for breakfast, the NK leadership sees to it that this is how americans are viewed by his people, its in his best interest to do so...in the same way, we here in the US are constantly told how crazy Kim Jung is, they love to report on his crazy antics.

But How do we know any of this even accurate? I have a sneaky feeling the US leadership wants most americans to have a certain image of NK and Kim, and its probably for their benefit in some way that majority of people believe it.

Im not sure what it is, but the US wants something in NK.

you smell it too. I never hear anything other than the lines of propaganda I have always heard that usually focus on the threat that NK poses, the inhuman conditions in the country and the oppressive regime. Even media like NOVA and Frontline toe the line. It's the same with Russia. You as a writer can always write something bad about the country or Putin or Russian aggression or the Russian invasion of whatever country. Its safe.
If you write something good about what Russia is doing in the space industry or the progress towards the New Silk Road and the bettering of millions of peoples lives throughout greater Asia you can lose your reputation, your livelyhood, everything. Peter Cohen is an example. He's one of a few people that advocates a different course with Russia and he has paid a price for it.

The US wants N Korea gone. They want a regime there that is pliable and above all capable of turning all those guns to the north. Ukraine is the same thing. If NATO can get fully functioning infrastructure for large amounts of aircraft into and around cities like Kharkov, Donetsk and Sebastopol that's a gun to Russias head. They're minutes away from some of the most vital infrastructure Russia has. N Korea would play the same role. They are right on the edge of some of Chinas most populous areas and vital infrastructure. Look on a map.

China has moved large parts of its army into Manchuria. Russia continues to strengthen its military all through its eastern regions and in the west they will have 5 Guards Armies in place by 2019 from St Petersburg to Rostov On Don.
China has made it clear that it will become involved on the side of N Korea. There will not be anybodies armies on the Yalu river not of the Asian persuasion.

[nicet4]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

Please list the wars "started by Democrats."

Here are a few definitely "started by Republicans."

Gulf War 1 - Bush 1
Afghanistan - Dubya
Gulf War 2 - Dubya

'Murica!

Vietnam 58,000 dead.

[jojajn]

Originally Posted by CAjerseychick

no, just trying to bring the knowledge that North korea was almost destroyed by America, and they do not plan on being victims again.

Does America understand this?

Rhetoric aside?

Then perhaps NK should stop threatening us with ballistic missiles. Do you understand that?

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by nicet4

Vietnam 58,000 dead.

Started...

Look it up.

[rbohm]

Originally Posted by BruSan

No kidding! That's coming through loud and clear. It also ignores the fact there were a few more countries than just the U.S. involved in the air and on the ground.

very true, there were a number of countries involved on the allied side, but except for britain, their involvement was fairly small. even the british involvement was small compared to US involvement. that said however, every little bit helped.

Originally Posted by BruSan

China stepped in long before that with logistical support and armaments to replace the loss of same when Stalin honoured his agreement upon establishment of the 38th parallel discussed as early as the Potsdam meetings. When the north invaded across that line Stalin had essentially washed his hands of N. Korea and stayed out of it but China stepped in big time.

not totally true about russia staying out. there wre actually russian pilots flying against american pilots in the war. the best pilots flying for the north were called "honchos" by american pilots, and they were in fact russian. often times those pilots, if they lost a dogfight and might be captured, were killed to prevent their identity from being known.

The U.S. didn't almost lose; the whole multinational force of U.N. participants would have lost had it not been for some timely actions contributed to by some commonwealth members in the mud with you like the battle of Kapyong for just one.

also very true.

The mistake was allowing the 'bone weariness' caused by years of WWII to override pushing them back to the Chinese border and holding there. We all should have considered it a worthy investment at the time but alas..... All countries involved carry the honour for stopping them but also the regret for not ending it in anything other than a stalemate. Those two imperatives are on all of us, not just the U.S.

i cant agree more on this either.

In retrospect, I, and probably a bunch of other old pharts my age, are wondering at this point in time how having the benefit of future foresight of this day would have influenced all those other country's participation level and U.N. vote on the issue of cessation of hostilities back in the day had they known what the ensuing 60 years would eventually bring about.

foresight is always a wonderful thing. unfortunately unless one is a true prophet, it is generally never available. i think however had they had the aid of future sight, truman might have fired macarthur much earlier to assuage the chinese fears of the allies invading china, and that might have kept them out of the korean war altogether, and we would have one korea now.

and i think that might have been beneficial for china as well as the US. the US would not be spending as much money in support and defense of korea, since there would be no real threat of korea being invaded by china, and china would have a stable trading partner in korea, one that actually pays their bills son china doesnt have to spend so much of their treasure to support a rogue regime.

and the rest of the world would not have to fear a nuclear armed korea with ICBMs and a rogue dictator that might be willing to use them.

i think if china opened up their eyes, and took a good hard look at the situation, and hat would happen with a unified korea under democratic rule instead of a dictatorship, they just might turn their backs on north korea, even if the US launches a first strike.

Originally Posted by BruSan

The ideal outcome would be one of a unified North and South Korea with that country being a functional democracy right on Communist China's doorstep.

That's the obvious desired outcome, but having said that, why is it you think the armistice has been allowed to idle along for over 60 years while N. Korean leaders have virtually starved their own populace resulting in their average lifespan and even body heights and mass being well behind that of their confreres in the south? If there is something there that the U.S. wants, why haven't they been more pro-active in attaining it before this?

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...-korea/250244/

More importantly why hasn't that august body of the U.N. been raising a drumbeat of stopping the atrocities committed by a succession of Kims.

You either attribute far more patience to U.S. leadership than has been demonstrated on any number of other issues or.......the alternative is simply the status quo being preferable to every other available option.

Originally Posted by J746NEW

Excellent Post
The Warmongers in this country really are a blight on this nation

The ones mostly rooting for war are the people that do not have skin in the game.

They talk about their preparations, farm and hide away place so of course, they do not want all that work to go to waste and want to see some destruction and death.



Why do we not just go home and police our on borders instead of following the PNAC Globalist Agenda?
Why not let China, Russia and South Korea handle it since he is on their borders?


If North Korea was teamed up with ships and soldiers on our Southern Border with Mexican Soldiers with us in their cross hairs, should we feel threatened?

I would support an attack against them as would all Americans

It appears North Korea is the one showing Strategic Patience

We are the bully in this scenario and God will act accordingly

we have these things called treaties, and one of these treaties with south korea is a status of forces agreement, and another is a mutual defense agreement.

as for warmongers, lets look at some shall we? how about obama who aided the muslim brotherhood and the arab spring in egypt and lybia, as well as syria. and he also continues the war in afghanistan as well.

bush43 did invade iraq and afghanistan

bush41 did not start the gulf war, he ended it

how about kennedy? he got us into vietnam, and johnson increased our presence there.

truman? got us into the korean war, as well as ordering the dropping of two nuclear warheads in anger

willson got us into world war one

mckinley got us into the spanish/american war

so it seems that presidents are about equally split between democrats and republicans for getting us into wars.

Originally Posted by J746NEW

I think South Korea, Japan, Russia and China should take some personal responsibility and deal with Kim since it is their own neighbor and we can come back home from our 10,000 mile trip and police our on borders.

I hope the people wishing for War and start WW3 have a nuke dropped drop close to them so they can see their kids vaporized before it over takes them as wel

i agree that china, russia, japan, and south korea need to get in the game, but north korea is the one driving the narrative right now.

as for the rest, you seem to be hoping for world war three and nuclear war just to punish some poeple, that is a very sick attitude to have.

Originally Posted by J746NEW

We have been the bully all along, 10,000 miles away from our own borders, spreading death and destruction since WW2

The warmongers will never have their appetite for death and destruction satiated
Next up will be Iran, and then the next boogie man will be Russia or China


It will never stop with these people, they are the biggest threat this country faces

really? the US is the bully? try again. in world war one, we got in to help our allies end a destructive war in europe. we were forced into world war two when japan bombed pearl harbor, and a few days later germany declared war on the US. in korea we were forced to fight when the north invaded the south. in vietnam we took over for the french. in grenada our citizens were being threatened. in gulf war one, kuwait was invaded, an we were asked to help regain their country. during the clinton administration, saddam constantly thumbed his nose at the cease fire agreement, so much so that clinton signed the iraqi freedom act that required that the US work for regime change in iraq, and thus president bush was only following the law when he ordered the invasion of iraq.