| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - China & US versus North Korea
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


China & US versus North Korea

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2017 at 12:34
Windemere
Good to hear from you. I agree with what you say. I've put up a few proposals in the hope of comment from other members and I understand that the answer, whatever it is, won't be easy, but I wonder just how long Kim Jon Un will be permitted to play fast and loose in the region with constant threats not only to close neighbours, but to those as far away as the US and Australia.

I don't think that embargoes are the answer, nor do I think that bribery is the answer either. It seems to me that armed intervention, or close threats of intervention are the only answer.

How do you see the problem being resolved?
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 309
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 May 2017 at 06:24
It might not be as easy as that for the U.S. military to cripple North Korea in a massive wave of air and artillery attacks early on (as was done in the 1991 & 2003 invasions of Iraq). It could likely be done, but would possibly  involve a massive loss of life among American ground troops (much larger than happened in Iraq, and something that the American public and political leadership likely wouldn't be willing to accept). Not to mention the economic cost. The 2003 invasion  and occupation of Iraq led to the economic  Recession in America, which is still going on.

In the aftermath, it could go either way. Possibly South Korea would overwhelm the North, reunite the country, establish a unitary government, and all would be well (as happened when North Vietnam quickly conquered South Vietnam in 1974).  But if North Korea retained sufficient military capacity to fight a defensive war against South Korea, it could develop into a long drawn-out  endless war, or possibly a guerrilla war.

Wars are always unpredictable, in spite of carefully planned out preparations. We never know what will happen, or how they'll turn out.

How China and Russia  would react to an American or South Korean attack on North Korea is also unpredictable.


Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 May 2017 at 00:34
Originally posted by AnchoriticSybarite AnchoriticSybarite wrote:

You are right if we follow the usual path limited military action which leads to more and more and finally after weeks or months full involvement.

The US military has the capacity if they strike first in a massive wave of air and artillery to cripple NK's capacity to respond. With current surveillance techniques (satelites, drones even human resources) I absolutely believe that the NK artillery aimed at Seoul can and would be suppressed until they can be overrun. AND THAT IS ALL THAT THE US MILITARY NEEDS TO DO.

If I could bend Trump's ear, I would tell him to talk to the Chinese AND the Russians and tell them to stay out. At the same time tell SK that the door is open to reunite their country. Without outside intervention, in a NK vs SK conflict I think the south could prevail in weeks, a month a most.

The sweetener for the Chinese would be our guarantee that within 90 days of reunification, the US would withdraw completely ALL US military personnel in the country. And would further guarantee the Korean peninsula to be a nuclear free zone.

I agree, but if that were to happen, would China take the opportunity to offer its assistance to their friends the Koreans? There would need to be something in place to prevent that don't you think?


It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 May 2017 at 20:46
You are right if we follow the usual path limited military action which leads to more and more and finally after weeks or months full involvement.

The US military has the capacity if they strike first in a massive wave of air and artillery to cripple NK's capacity to respond. With current surveillance techniques (satelites, drones even human resources) I absolutely believe that the NK artillery aimed at Seoul can and would be suppressed until they can be overrun. AND THAT IS ALL THAT THE US MILITARY NEEDS TO DO.

If I could bend Trump's ear, I would tell him to talk to the Chinese AND the Russians and tell them to stay out. At the same time tell SK that the door is open to reunite their country. Without outside intervention, in a NK vs SK conflict I think the south could prevail in weeks, a month a most.

The sweetener for the Chinese would be our guarantee that within 90 days of reunification, the US would withdraw completely ALL US military personnel in the country. And would further guarantee the Korean peninsula to be a nuclear free zone.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 May 2017 at 20:36
If food shipments were stopped completely tomorrow, the NK regime could make up the shortfall overnight by simply executing the political prisoners they already hold.

I know of no examples where sanctions have compelled a totalitarian regime to cease its policies. God forbid I should ever say a good word about Obama, BUT when he moved to normalize relations with Cuba all he was doing was to public admit that well over a half century of American policy punishing Cuba with sanctions had produced absolutely no concessions on their part. What was even worse was that sanctions devastated the Cuban people while not inconveniencing their leaders in the slightest.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 May 2017 at 13:32
You are right, things are screwed up in North Korea, and we (the US) have the power to do a lot of things, and screw them up more.  So we can kick over the anthill.  But we don't have the power to set something up afterwards that will last and be peaceful.  No, we would have to occupy North Korea and set up a new regime.  Otherwise we cannot be sure that we got all the fissionable material, all the scientists, and all the research, all the VX, all the other WMDs.  At least they are right now all in the same "place."  Introduce chaos, and you won't know what will happen.  Although North Korean artillery, dug into the hills, is in range of Seoul. It would be very easy to send some shells full of Sarin into South Korea's capital city, especially if the North Korean regime is going down.
It is not just a matter of blowing up things, we have to go to sites, some of which we don't know where they are, but we have to confirm their destruction, recover material and paperwork, chase down scientists and military men that may have WMDs.  It is not just a matter of construction, it is a matter of clean up afterwards.  And there is always the possibility that something is buried, figuratively or literally, which will surface as a hazard 20 years from now.
Or we could just kick over the ant hill and hope for the best.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 May 2017 at 22:07
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

North Korean belligerence is partially Kim Jung Un catering to the only group that really counts, the military.  Ironically, the overt attempt to display strength is a sign of weakness.  North Korea is propped up by the external threat of, well, probably the world.  Part of that is the fact that it was the world, or at least the UN against them.  I wonder if they are a UN member today.

Remember that North Korea has the 4th largest military, but nowhere near the 4th largest in population.

Were the USA to go to war with North Korea, without assistance of allied nations, it would overpower North Korea with it's Air Force and Naval forces.

The USA Battle Fleets with the super carriers in the lead would dominate the North Korean Navy, and the US Nuclear Powered boomers would prove more than a match for the 70 or so submarines operated by North Korea. Or at least that's the way I see it.

I think the only place land forces would come into play would be at the 38th parallel, to prevent more tunneling and invasion by North Korean forces.

Is the US were to make a pre-0emptive strike against the NoKo Missils Bases, I think it would be, basically, game, set and match.


It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 May 2017 at 12:44
North Korean belligerence is partially Kim Jung Un catering to the only group that really counts, the military.  Ironically, the overt attempt to display strength is a sign of weakness.  North Korea is propped up by the external threat of, well, probably the world.  Part of that is the fact that it was the world, or at least the UN against them.  I wonder if they are a UN member today.

Remember that North Korea has the 4th largest military, but nowhere near the 4th largest in population.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 May 2017 at 11:31
I agree, but somehow I think it would still take a lot more than that for the North Korean people/military to revolt. They're far too indoctrinated with the current system. I think they'd be more likely to lash out at South Korea or Japan, or both.


It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 May 2017 at 11:26
Delivery of wheat or rice feeds the people, it does not feed the government, although it might contribute to stability.  Everybody would know where that grain is coming from originally.  It would not feed any North Korean War machine.  It would probably be embarrassing to the regime, which would be another good reason to do it.  
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2017 at 19:31
Originally posted by AnchoriticSybarite AnchoriticSybarite wrote:

For over 60 years the USSR and China propped up the NK regime because it suited their purposes in pursuing the Cold War. Todays Russia is a slender revenent of the once powerful USSR and China's economy is so highly tied to US consumption today that they might very well take NK so as to prevent any kind of conflict which could threaten their own interests.

As for paying off the NK in the interest of expediency, is there a sliding scale. X for one nuke; 3X for one nuke + missile system; 100X for 5 nukes + delivery systems; 10000X for 10 nukes + delivery systems; ad infinitum; ad nauseum.

I agree, and for the reasons you've mentioned, I don't think any sort of payoff will be contemplated, except maybe a payload, not a payoff!
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2017 at 18:16
For over 60 years the USSR and China propped up the NK regime because it suited their purposes in pursuing the Cold War. Todays Russia is a slender revenent of the once powerful USSR and China's economy is so highly tied to US consumption today that they might very well take NK so as to prevent any kind of conflict which could threaten their own interests.

As for paying off the NK in the interest of expediency, is there a sliding scale. X for one nuke; 3X for one nuke + missile system; 100X for 5 nukes + delivery systems; 10000X for 10 nukes + delivery systems; ad infinitum; ad nauseum.

Edited by AnchoriticSybarite - 18 May 2017 at 18:17
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2017 at 18:03
Thank you for the Vietnam analogy. It proves my point.

Displaying enormous ineptitude, American leaders tumbled down the path of good intentions one little step at a time. Houdini would have been proud of how we went from a couple of hundred advisors to over half a million men. In the process we proved definitively that you do not hunt fleas with tanks.

If we follow the same course with NK then they WILL win. Whether they use conventional weapons or if they can deploy a nuke either by missile, plane or even in a freighter, even if we win we lose.

America needs to decide one simple question. Can NK be allowed to possess nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Short of allowing US occupation of NK, there is nothing that the N Koreans can do to assure us that they have or will eliminate the program. Given the 25 years of failure by all diplomatic means, we are left with a military option.

If a 10% loss factor is acceptable, then go for 25%. If there is to be a military strike, then it cannot be a measured strike, but a massive one. Suppress the artillery positions within range of Seoul with FAE's and the entire US bomber force. Then quickly seize the sources of NK's nuclear program.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 May 2017 at 19:04
I've never claimed to be a "dove", if Trump could get the other big boys on the block to go to the beach for the day, and then beat the crap out of the Fat Kid, it would be a win-win. A win for the NoKo population, a win for the South Koreans, the Japanese, the Chinese, the USA and just about everyone else you could think of.

Quite frankly, Franky, Mr Trump is coming across to me as being both a little unstable, as witnessed by his lies and sacking anyone who disagrees with him, and beligerant, as shown by his comments about both China and Russia. He certainly hasn't displayed any diplomacy.

He could well find himself short of friends if he chose to go to war. He's treated some other country's leaders shamefully, Angela Merkel and Malcolm Turnbull among them.

While I've always supported our troops, and always will, I would not support an Australian government decision to follow Trump into any conflict he may wish to engage in, unless it was shown to be in Australia's best interests, and independent of those of the USA.




It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 May 2017 at 13:22
But, the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know, or at least so they say....  It might be cheaper to pay them off, than to throw them out.  That doesn't mean that you give them everything and anything, hopefully enough to provide some stability.  If you could just get North Korea to care about their own people.  Instead of the kleptocracy that is connected at the hip to the military.  We like to look at Kim Jong Un as crazy, but the fact is he has to walk a tightrope at home, having to keep the military happy.

I don't know what is best, but I have some trust in the professionals in the state department.  I do not trust President Trump on North Korea (nor much else, but definitely not North Korea), on the other hand, I don't fool myself into thinking I know what is going on.  He has knowledgable people, I hope he knows when and how to listen to them.  I "hope."
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 May 2017 at 11:58
You could be right, but it's bribery, and as history shows, once the price has been paid, often there are more and higher demands.

I agree with what you say about Russia and China, I don't know the answer. It wouldn't be a good idea to attack North Korea, only to create retaliation by one of the others, but somehow, I don't think that would happen.

Both China and Russia, imho, are more than just a little nervous about what the Fat Kid is doing, and if the US put a stop to it, without occupying North Korea, thereby bringing US forces to Chinesse and/or Russian borders, it might just work. I don't know.


It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 May 2017 at 09:59
Asking China or Russia to either back him or stay out of it, is like asking for a blank check.  You can ask, but you are probably not going to get it.  Whatever missile systems North Korea has, both Russia and China are in range.  If we are so worried about North Korea getting in range and with WMDs, then why would we think that Russia or China would want to provoke North Korea in order solve "our" problems?

It might just be easier to send North Korea every year a shipment of grain, which US farmers overproduce anyways.  Pay them off, if not for our sake but for the sake of South Korea and Japan.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 May 2017 at 11:52
I think that the President, through stupidity, political strength or pure big boy bullying has the will power to launch an attack on North Korea. But first, imo, he would like an assurance from China and Russia that they would either back him or stay the hell out of it.

If he had that assurance, the gates are open and the Fat Kid should start getting pretty bloody nervous.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 May 2017 at 11:16
Clausewitz said that "War was politics by other means."  In Western antiquity, the art of war was the highest form of politics (Plato, Machiavelli), the most difficult, where the most was at stake.

Moynihan was a liberal democrat, but hawkish, a "Reagan democrat."  Liberal on social issues, but hawkish of defense and foreign policy.

During the era of Mao, Red China had the attitude that in a war, a 10% loss in population is acceptable.  Kissinger talks about China as having a totally different military strategy (at least at that time) than the West.  North Korea probably has the same attitude, which is possible in a police state, but not in a democracy.  I mean if you think about it, more people died in car crashes on American roads during the Vietnam War than died in Vietnam, and yet we ring our hands, about the great loss of life of Americans in Vietnam.  The losses of the Viet Cong, the NVA, and the North Vietnamese population was in the millions, the loss of American life was, what 79,000?  So could North Korea win?  Sure they can, if they make us play their game, instead of us making them play ours.  Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to win.  But the question is, do we have the wherewithal to follow through with a large scale war.  I am not talking about the military power, I am talking about the intestinal and testicular fortitude to follow through.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 May 2017 at 20:17
There is the old aphorism about war being the continuation of diplomacy but with different means. There is some measure of truth to the statement.

However it is vital to realize that there is a basic difference between war and diplomacy. With diplomacy the process is almost as important as the goal. The aim is to reach an accommodation; a meeting of the minds. Diplomacy is about finding a solution which both sides can live with.

War on the other hand is all about the goal. It is about bending the opponent (almost said "other guy") to your will or and it makes no intrinsic difference eliminating his ability to resist you.

The problem especially with modern Western democracies is that they tend to blur the lines between the two.

In the case in point, the US vs North Korea. No one in the entire world can conceive of any scenario where the North Koreans defeats the US. That being the case it is the obligation of the US to temper its actins toward the N Koreans. We must convince them. We must cajole them. Incentivize them. Pressure them gently but firmly down the path we think best.

However the problems we have with NK are not trade negotiations, monetary manipulatons, fishing rights or the like. Rather there is an existential question of whether we will allow them to develop not only nuclear weapons but the missile technology necessary to deliver them especially to the mainland US.

If that is the case then it is the US's obligation to deliver a strike so strong that there is no possibility of their getting off a lucky shot which could kill a hundred thousand SKorean civilians or a million Japanese.

As far back as the elder Bush when this confrontation with NK began. Even that staunch liberal demoncratic Senator from NY Daniel Monyhan when asked what the elder Bush should do if the North Koreans didn't back down over their nuclear plant. His response: BOMB 'EM.

By the way thanks for the comment about my moniker. Decades ago I worked in a personnel office and we were beginning to do the yearly personnel evaluations. The person delegated to do my evaluation was swamped so I jokingly asked him if he wanted me to do my own. When he said sure. I described myself as an anchoritic sybarite. Amazingly he laughed, signed it, and put it in my file. Ever since that's how I've styled myself.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3505
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 May 2017 at 13:10
When 9/11 happened, there was a guy at the coffeehouse I hung out at who had been a cabbie in NYC.  He argued that we shouldn't do a proportional response (measured response) in reaction to 9/11.  It is not really clear what a response is if it is not in some way, proportional.  What is it, if it isn't proportional?  A violent spasm?  I would also argue that the invasion of Afghanistan, was a proportional, measured response.  An effort to achieve a goal, now the ball has been dropped in following through and finishing that goal, as it has with Iraq.  I would worry about the same thing in North Korea, Americans are idealistic and in awe with their own firepower, but do you think that we would finish what we start, or would we be  relying on China to either finish or be a substitute?

I like your moniker, AnchoriticSybarite
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 May 2017 at 20:18
I've been saying for almost a year now, that assuming Trump won the Presidency he would have to tackle the problem the North Korean nuclear program if for no other reason to put the fear of God into the imams running Iran. Two for the price of one.

The best option is the one he is actively pursuing enlisting the Chinese into helping solve their client. But this is a problem that has a limited shelf life.

Not being a fly on the wall listening to Trump talking with Chinese leader. I would hope the conversation went something like this. He is your problem and I expect you to solve it and in the VERY near future. I cannot afford to allow him to reach the point where he can mount nukes on missiles that can reach Japan much less the continental Us.

If we reach the point where I cannot reasonably expect you to resolve the problem, the US will have to intervene--militarily. There will be no pinprick attacks, no measured repsonses, no beginning with small attacks building to stronger ones. AND the US's avowed goal will be the reunification of Korea. A reunification where we will definitively guarantee the sovereignty of the new country against you specifically and where ALL US troops will be removed from the entire peninsula within 6 months.

I really believe that this would goad China into taking on the problem themselves. If not then we get a double bonus of a nuclear free Korea and the enormous drain on the American economy of keeping our huge military presence in Korea.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2017 at 14:35
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

No problemo.
Also think of what Trump said about Japan having nukes to protect themselves from NoKo. Now that will be a motivation for China to contain KJU. A nuclear Japan would be a nightmare for China.

I agree.

I can see a bumper sticker coming on "NUKE NoKo"
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1841
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2017 at 11:48
No problemo.
Also think of what Trump said about Japan having nukes to protect themselves from NoKo. Now that will be a motivation for China to contain KJU. A nuclear Japan would be a nightmare for China.
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." - Mark Twain
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Apr 2017 at 17:57
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Quote  How would we like it if someone invaded Mexico ?

by Vanuatu.

Of course you asked the question, I'd love to read your answer.

Is it possible that I have erred? 

I would not have thought so, but if I did, I didn't mean to.
If I did, I apologise.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1841
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Apr 2017 at 14:41
LOL my friend I can't find that quote. 

If another country invaded Mexico, I think the US could and should defend the continent. I wish there weren't such evil people coming here from Mexico. It's sad the quality of life is poor for most of Mexico. 
They want a better deal.



MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Relations between the United States and Mexico have seen "enormous progress" during the first months of the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray said on Thursday.

His remarks followed a Wednesday night call between Trump and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto in which the leaders discussed the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Videgaray said the call, which was initiated by Pena Nieto and lasted about 20 minutes, focused exclusively on the looming talks over NAFTA's "renegotiation and modernization.” He noted that Trump wanted to see the talks accelerated.

"We have generated a respectful dynamic through dialogue ... we've advanced enormously in the correct direction," Videgaray told local broadcaster Televisa in an interview.

He added that the two leaders did not set a date for a summit.

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." - Mark Twain
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Apr 2017 at 15:44
Quote  How would we like it if someone invaded Mexico ?

by Vanuatu.

Of course you asked the question, I'd love to read your answer.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1841
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Apr 2017 at 00:48
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Vanuatu wrote
Quote  How would we like it if someone invaded Mexico ?

I don't think you really meant that, did you?

If some country invaded Mexico and cleaned up the crime and corruption, the US would be overjoyed-providing it wasn't a communist country. Perhaps the US could pursuade one of it's alies to invade. Obviously the US would assist.

But, of course, I'm joking.

If Mexico suddenly adopted a communist stance, I think it probable that the US would be watching very carefully to ensure that no weapons threat to the US emerged. Cuba Mark II.

As for China and NoKo, I'm not sure. China has been very patient, but it can't be expected to sit still forever while The Fat Kid threatens global conflict.


What the ZIP? Is this one of those English/Australian language barriers?Wink
Vanuatu
The big difference is that we speak English.

I don't understand what
Quote What the ZIP? Is this one of those English/Australian language barriers.
means.

I don't remember asking about an invasion of Mexico. That's my quote? Or is that the joke?

"what the zip?" is what the kids say, to curse without cursing.



Edited by Vanuatu - 29 Apr 2017 at 00:48
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." - Mark Twain
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5178
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2017 at 15:38
Vanuatu
The big difference is that we speak English.

I don't understand what
Quote What the ZIP? Is this one of those English/Australian language barriers.
means.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1841
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Apr 2017 at 11:16
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Vanuatu wrote
Quote  How would we like it if someone invaded Mexico ?

I don't think you really meant that, did you?

If some country invaded Mexico and cleaned up the crime and corruption, the US would be overjoyed-providing it wasn't a communist country. Perhaps the US could pursuade one of it's alies to invade. Obviously the US would assist.

But, of course, I'm joking.

If Mexico suddenly adopted a communist stance, I think it probable that the US would be watching very carefully to ensure that no weapons threat to the US emerged. Cuba Mark II.

As for China and NoKo, I'm not sure. China has been very patient, but it can't be expected to sit still forever while The Fat Kid threatens global conflict.


What the ZIP? Is this one of those English/Australian language barriers?Wink
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." - Mark Twain
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.