Printable View
I think the reason we didn't attack North Korea is because of their miliitary strength. North Korea has 1.1 million man army and an atomic bomb, plus a few big allies behind them. (Russia and China) Iraq has no one, and no weapons of mass destruction and very weak army.
I remember a mate of mine sent me a link for that once...that was well funny...Quote:
Originally posted by: JusDaMan
Does any1 remember that funny website with the nukes and crap? i remember something like.
hokay ruling out the ice melting
meteor crashing to the earth
and the sun exploding. we will definately blow ourselves up
hokay so we got america china uk pakastan russia and india with nukes the US got 26000 more than anyone else. So one day bush wants to lauch those chinese sons of a bitches.
etc etc.
and it ends with like
califorina's gonna hang with hallwaii.... alaska can come too
THE END
...and Australia was all like "WTF mate?"
and the funniest thing was the french guys who said something like...
Fire ze missiles!
But I am le tired
well then have a nap THEN FIRE ZE MISSILES!!
Russia isnt a big ally lol, theyre ppl eat bark soup.Quote:
Originally posted by: Xollence
I think the reason we didn't attack North Korea is because of their miliitary strength. North Korea has 1.1 million man army and an atomic bomb, plus a few big allies behind them. (Russia and China) Iraq has no one, and no weapons of mass destruction and very weak army.
Hahaha nice [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] Yeah we would stomp the hell out of N Korea in a war, but it would be virtually impossible to occupy the country with ground forces until it was just a pile of smouldering ash, not to mention we would probably trigger a chain reaction leading to a flash WW3 .. Pakistan vs India, China reclaiming Formosa/Taiwan, Russia retaking eastern bloc territory, etc.
And yeah, going into Iraq = BIG STUPID WASTE OF MONEY AND LIVES .. I guarantee the answer to why it happened has everything to do with money and corruption
person holding sign: *free tibet*
peter: I'll take it!
*goes to phone*
peter: hello china? I think i have something you want
*pauses*
peter: thats right......all the tea....
didnt china help N. Korea out when we were there before? i dont think we'd be able to take them both on.....not without alot of sacrifice anyway
That's true, during the last Korean conflict (roughly 1950-53) the Chinese were supplying the N Koreans, hell even the Russians were sending Mig 15s AND PILOTS!! Heheh. The huge difference with a modern war is that there would no longer be a continual ground engagement, but instead round-the-clock heavy bombing .. and as points of desperation were reached, would probably escalate into nuclear war.
The last Korean war was a bit more complicated because both sides didn't want to escalate the matter into WW3, but I don't think that either side would hold anything back this time around, which would lead to absolute devastation of Korea/China, and any other forces brave/stupid enough to engage the US. The reason ?
Conventional War = US domination (Heavy Bombing/AWACS Air Superiority/Sattelite-Guided Missiles/Bunker-busting bombs ) .. basically there would be no point in assembling planes/tanks/men, because they would be sitting ducks just waiting for death from afar. Same situation as Iraq had in the 1st gulf war, they had one of the world's largest and most modern armies (had plenty of Russia's top-of-the-line Mig29, and latest Russian Tanks) .. but with range superiority, its like a boxer with a 5 foot reach fighting someone with a 1 foot reach .. the Iraqi army never could get in range to strike.
Nuclear War = US domination (Fastest firing, most accurate targeting, longest range, highest payload ICBMs in history, Ohio SSBNs that far outclass anything else in the world .. a single Ohio can launch more missiles in 6 minutes than China has in it's active international arsenal!)
The only way to bog down and possibly defeat the US .. is to engage it in a prolonged and deadly guerrilla war .. bring it down to old-school soldier-to-soldier attrition in an up-close and personal hell like Vietnam or some of the untamed areas of Iraq right now.
Large scale war simply doesn't exist in the form that it did in WW1/WW2/Korea anymore .. one side or the other will have devastating losses rather quickly because of technological superiority. Go to http://www.historyguy.com/GulfWar.html and look at the numbers ..
US = 148 KIA, 400+ Wounded
Iraq = Up to 100,000 KIA, unknown wounded .. probably twice as many ..
Is this good news? I'm not sure .. war is just one thing .. bad. To have absolute and unquestionable dominance such as the US has makes things kind of scary, because if that power was to fall under evil intent, there would be nothing to stop it. On the other hand, it seems to be keeping major international powers very apprehensive about things they most likely would love to do, if only the US wouldn't come in and stomp their asses flat. China wants Formosa, N Korea wants S Korea, Pakistan and India both want each other dead and to claim Kashmir, all the Arab nations want Israel dead and vice versa, Russia wants Chechnya and a variety of other lost territories, the list goes on. A likely possibility is that once one of the hot spots flares up big, other countries will join in to take advantage of the confusion, and the division of US power. The US couldn't fight a war in China, the Koreas, Russia, the Middle East, and Europe simultaneously, aside from just leveling everyone with planet-killers. And nobody wants that ending ...
Memnoch speaks the correct,
Yeah. This was the still at a shakey time period leading to the cold war. Communists want their countries. South Korean's want theirs too. North Korea recently gotten their bomb. I think around or slightly before 2002 (Issit??). That wasn't really long ago. Now they are a country that would have very drastic circumstances should US invade. Sorry...liberate.Quote:
Originally posted by: MemnochTheCaT
That's true, during the last Korean conflict (roughly 1950-53) the Chinese were supplying the N Koreans, hell even the Russians were sending Mig 15s AND PILOTS!! Heheh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/2604437.stm
Well, thats the strange thing about today. Lack of action, and you'll get terrorist doing all kinds of stuff. If you take pre-emptive action. You'll get people complaining. Unfortunately we'll never see the circumstance of both sides 'what if' how things work out.
Case in point: After World War 2, GEneral Marshall, called off he Nationalist attack in China, led by Chiang Kai Shek who was already winning and fighting off the Communists because The commies and the US were buddies. For the mean time. Had it not been called off, he probably wouldn't have a Korean War, A vietnam War, or even a cold war.
Where do you think the next flashpoint will flare up at? My $ is on India vs. Pakistan, based on my opinion that if/when Musharraf gets assassinated, the Pakistani military will attempt a pre-emptive nuclear strike on India's population centers in order to claim Kashmir fully.
Check this out : http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...pakistan_x.htm
All evidence related to the attempted assassination attempts on Musharraf indicate that they are being developed from WITHIN the Pakistani government. Add to this the fact that the population of Pakistan overwhelmingly supports terrorism, al qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, and ANY and ALL forms of violence and war against all non-muslims, and you have an almost guaranteed recipe for mass bloodshed.
Kind of interesting, a few nutcases could quite literally start a flash war in which a few billion people get incinerated. We will probably see this happen in the next few years or so .. barring a miracle. I fear that outside of experiencing an almost biblical armageddon, the brainwashed fundamentalist islamic retards will continue on this path to certain death ..
I think there will be an assasination attempt on bush i mean bush tries it on other leaders someones bound to target him.
There are only a handful of agencies in the world who could pose a credible threat, if they wished, to the president. Israel's Mossad comes to mind as a group expert in assassinations. However, that being said, there is no viable reason to do so. Bush would simply be replaced by someone who would go on making the exact same policy decisions, so the only reason would be personal vengeance.Quote:
Originally posted by: AkimichiChouji
I think there will be an assasination attempt on bush i mean bush tries it on other leaders someones bound to target him.
Where threats of assassination get really severe is when a majority of your own country wants you dead and buried... like Musharraf. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
yeh, musharraf was almost assinated like 3 times, each time he escaped. For some reason i find that funny, that like a bomb goes off and he goesQuote:
Where threats of assassination get really severe is when a majority of your own country wants you dead and buried... like Musharraf
HEHEHE
and runs away through the open door
http://sobigandblack.mediahalo.com/i...19042iraq1.jpg this is just horrible lol.
i garuntee that kid has no idea of what that sign says.
either that or its one of those images where people just go in and photoshop whatever they want it to say
Lol that's awesome .. looks a little fake though [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]Quote:
Originally posted by: Xollence
http://sobigandblack.mediahalo.com/i...19042iraq1.jpg this is just horrible lol.
.. who cares about the Iraq war .. not me ..
Hasn't there been "hits" on fidel Castro for quite some time now? except every one has failed so far?Quote:
Originally posted by: MemnochTheCaT
There are only a handful of agencies in the world who could pose a credible threat, if they wished, to the president. Israel's Mossad comes to mind as a group expert in assassinations. However, that being said, there is no viable reason to do so. Bush would simply be replaced by someone who would go on making the exact same policy decisions, so the only reason would be personal vengeance.Quote:
Originally posted by: AkimichiChouji
I think there will be an assasination attempt on bush i mean bush tries it on other leaders someones bound to target him.
Where threats of assassination get really severe is when a majority of your own country wants you dead and buried... like Musharraf. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
example: Married with children..
if anyone remembers that episode
@MemnochTheCaT
dude u gotta be kidding me! pakistani population supports terrorism and any/all forms of violence?
this is the type of western ignorance and stupidity that really pisses me off. Its exactly this kind of stuff that ignites the fire that is terrorism. First of all, the kashmir conflict isn't important enuff to start a nuclear war. Pakistan isn't trying to "claim" kashmir, its trying to get rid of the self appointed indian control in the area....and recently musharraf has said "fuck it" since the kashmiri ppl aren't doing anyhitng themselves (i personally agree with him....no point in getting ur ppl killed for someone who's not willing to fight for themselves)
secondly, its true that all assasination attempts are from within pakistan, from apposing political parties. these are the ppl who dont want change, ie: education in rural areas. If the villagers in the rural parts of pakistan were to be educated, the peer's (village "leaders"....basically local dictators) would lose money and power. there are also fundementalists who think musharraf's sold out to the us. these are the ones who want musharraf dead, not the rest of the country, since hes the only leader in a VERY long time thats not corrupt and actually has balls.
thirdly, the ppl who support al qauda and other terrorist groups only make up about 0.001% of the population. these are the molvi's who run the madrasa's (islamic skools).....they have no education whatsoever (and i mean that literally) and think anything that has a different view that what they've *learned* (there is a difference between what they know and what the quran says)should be destroyed.
lastly, those ppl u mite have seen in the news holding signs praising bin laden etc, are idiots. they have no formal education past middle skool, and believe whatever the molvi's say. they in no way represent the rest of the country, or the government.
sorry if i sound angry, but it really bugs me when ppl make judgements based on what they've seen in the news or read on the internet......its what the bush administration is doing rite now, with the whole "with us or against us" thing. the world isn't simply black and white, there are about 999, 999, 999.1 shades of gray in the middle.
Yes, I've been to India and Pakistan (also Egypt, and many other countries in the middle east and asia). MOST of the people I talked to absolutely support what the terrorists are trying to accomplish, and Bin Laden is in particular, a HERO to the population at large. Out of maybe 50 conversations I had with locals, I only talked to a couple that didn't profess joy at the violence that Al Queda has accomplished.
On another note, I DETEST what our government has done internationally .. well .. ever since the 40s really. Bush is a global embarrassment.
But before you call something 'western ignorance', go travel the world to learn what that truly is. It's not ignorant to know that the population of Pakistan overwhelmingly LOATHES the western powers, ESPECIALLY the USA. It's just the truth, nothing more. Of all the middle-eastern countries I visited (I skipped Israel and Saudi Arabia), the most friendly population was the Jordanians .. but there was still a definite hesitation to talk, and a veiled fear of 'speaking freely'.
Yes, there are shades of grey, but there are a couple of pretty clear conclusions :
(1)- The Muslim population in the middle east (particularly in places like Pakistan) basically hates non-muslims.
(2)- Who cares!? Let them hate us, leave them in their 3rd world countries! Bush is doing it all wrong .. waste of time going to Iraq .. terrorism is only as important as you are willing to make it, and we are sacrificing freedom for 'security', not to mention igniting global hate for the US.