I know the Japs only can have a defense force but I don't get why the US has to be there? Many years has passed and they are still there...I think the Japs can defend them selves.Cybargs wrote:
1) of course it isaerodynamic wrote:
I think its more of US's interest to have bases around.Cybargs wrote:
eh... you do realize the only reason there are US military bases in SK is because of NK threat right? Japan: US won WW2 and now it's role is to help Japanese defence. Philippines: former US colony.
I doubt china would care that much about US bases in NK. The US is already a cunts hair away.
I think Japan has the resources and money to maintain they own defense now.
Its the same reason the US has multiple bases in Italy.
2) Under their constitution they are only allowed to have a defensive military... Which means almost 0 naval strike capabilities and no nuclear weapons capabilities. They need the US for various reasons.
3) NATO NATO NATO, that is why US has bases in Italy and it was to defend against communism during the cold war.
US doesn't really need to have bases abroad... That's what they got the Marines for
US bases = economic output for host countries. soldiers have to go out and have fun ya know? US is in Japan after a treaty in WW2 and it's in Japans benefit to have US bases. doesn't hurt to have a US base in your country, no one would really want to fuck with you that way. For NATO... It's just a NATO thing even though the cold war is over. It's kinda a middle finger and go "thanks for protecting us now fuck off"aerodynamic wrote:
I know the Japs only can have a defense force but I don't get why the US has to be there? Many years has passed and they are still there...I think the Japs can defend them selves.Cybargs wrote:
1) of course it isaerodynamic wrote:
I think its more of US's interest to have bases around.
I think Japan has the resources and money to maintain they own defense now.
Its the same reason the US has multiple bases in Italy.
2) Under their constitution they are only allowed to have a defensive military... Which means almost 0 naval strike capabilities and no nuclear weapons capabilities. They need the US for various reasons.
3) NATO NATO NATO, that is why US has bases in Italy and it was to defend against communism during the cold war.
US doesn't really need to have bases abroad... That's what they got the Marines for
And uhm...taht was cold war, I don't really think Italy or the europe countries under danger from a communsit threat. Who wants Italy anyways, its a shit country with a shit economy with lots of crime problems and lazy ass italians.
Last edited by Cybargs (2010-11-23 05:30:01)
It's probably way worse than that, actually. I don't know whether it's more or less sad (than pals and jews) the fact that these people are exactly the same in every way except political ideology and that's why there's so much hate.11 Bravo wrote:
these two are getting as bad as the pals and jews
They do it every year. They rehearse going into the positions they would take if war ever broke out.aerodynamic wrote:
But they don't want the US right on their border either.Cybargs wrote:
Yeah it's legal. Korean war isn't over yet.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
Great work North Korea, you're really testing everyones patience.
So it is technically not illegal since the Korean war never officially ended?
E: Obviously it breaks the ceasefire agreement... but since both countries are still in a state of war...
Kmar: If it comes to war... China probably would side step. they're getting pretty pissed at NK already.
But seriously, what's up with South Koreans and Us soldiers doing military exercises right next to the border?
They know the North's gov is very easily provokable.
I guess a few small yield nukes would remove the majority of the North Korean population, but we'd need to hit them before they could send off anything themselves.JohnG@lt wrote:
War with NK would suck so bad. Those people have been so brainwashed over the past sixty years that it would end up being worse than fighting in Iraq, Vietnam or Afghanistan. I would expect Japanese style banzai charges from civilians.
I don't think islamo extremism and this are far apart in mentality. Atleast their country has control over the population so you won't have to deal with guerillas for decades.JohnG@lt wrote:
War with NK would suck so bad. Those people have been so brainwashed over the past sixty years that it would end up being worse than fighting in Iraq, Vietnam or Afghanistan. I would expect Japanese style banzai charges from civilians.
nukes will never be used in war. Even if one side uses them the other will be too afraid of M.A.D to do anything is my guess.Turquoise wrote:
I guess a few small yield nukes would remove the majority of the North Korean population, but we'd need to hit them before they could send off anything themselves.
The tricky part would be keeping the fallout from reaching South Korea.
Well, it depends on a number of things. I'm pretty sure China doesn't truly care about North Korea at this point because of all the money they're making from the West now.dayarath wrote:
nukes will never be used in war. Even if one side uses them the other will be too afraid of M.A.D to do anything is my guess.Turquoise wrote:
I guess a few small yield nukes would remove the majority of the North Korean population, but we'd need to hit them before they could send off anything themselves.
The tricky part would be keeping the fallout from reaching South Korea.
That's about right, their population is starving and the country is out of resources. If anything all the sanctions will be moving the country to extreme measures because they'll have nothing to lose soon.Turquoise wrote:
If anything, North Korea has become a thorn in everyone's side.
Last edited by dayarath (2010-11-23 08:05:05)
It's an interesting question. South Korea apparently has an amazing amount of restraint.dayarath wrote:
That's about right, their population is starving and the country is out of resources. If anything all the sanctions will be moving the country to extreme measures because they'll have nothing to lose soon.Turquoise wrote:
If anything, North Korea has become a thorn in everyone's side.
I wonder how much more SK will swallow before they start retaliating. In about a decade's time NK has been responsible for atleast a hundred deaths followed by complete denial, putting the blame on SK and threats of more aggression.
I doubt the SK population is as lenient as their politicians TBH, having two events like this follow up on eachother within year's time will have alot of warmongering going in their country.Turquoise wrote:
It's an interesting question. South Korea apparently has an amazing amount of restraint.
I doubt anyone would use nukes on North Korea unless they started using them first, it would look way too inhumane. There's plenty of conventional ways of stopping someone from launching nukes instead of nuking them first. North Korea would definitely fall/lose in the event of any war, but the casualties for US/Western forces and South Korea would be huge.Turquoise wrote:
I guess a few small yield nukes would remove the majority of the North Korean population, but we'd need to hit them before they could send off anything themselves.JohnG@lt wrote:
War with NK would suck so bad. Those people have been so brainwashed over the past sixty years that it would end up being worse than fighting in Iraq, Vietnam or Afghanistan. I would expect Japanese style banzai charges from civilians.
The tricky part would be keeping the fallout from reaching South Korea.
Well considering these excersises are annually, I wonder why after decades they decided to barrage an island now instead of in earlier years.Mekstizzle wrote:
From what I've read it was the South Koreans who provoked it by having arty exercises really close to the border, so it wasn't an unprovoked massive barrage as everyone seems to beleive...there's abit of background to it...
Saddam didn't have nuclear bombs, so their WMDs would have been chemical. The US forces have chemical warfare suits. I'm pretty sure those suits can take just about any chemical attack.Mekstizzle wrote:
If Saddam really did have weapons of mass destruction, you really think the US/UK/Coalition would have invaded. He would have used them on the invading troops and caused massive casualties, something the Western nations are unable to deal with anymore (even though Saddam would have still eventually lost).Turquoise wrote:
I guess a few small yield nukes would remove the majority of the North Korean population, but we'd need to hit them before they could send off anything themselves.JohnG@lt wrote:
War with NK would suck so bad. Those people have been so brainwashed over the past sixty years that it would end up being worse than fighting in Iraq, Vietnam or Afghanistan. I would expect Japanese style banzai charges from civilians.
The tricky part would be keeping the fallout from reaching South Korea.
Last edited by -Sh1fty- (2010-11-23 08:26:26)