ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags China-Korea relations , North Korea incidents , North Korea issues , US-China relations , US-North Korea relations

Reply
Old 30th November 2010, 12:44 AM   #121
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
 
Quad4_72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,354
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
All this stuff about China won't risk it, sounds an awful lot like the incorrect predictions of 1950. We held a large technological edge back then, but a million Chinese managed to overwhelm that technology. This is not some backwater country anymore. They can keep coming. The Chinese will not run out of soldiers. They have over 2 million in their active army and hundreds of millions in reserve.
Holy crap, hundreds of millions in their reserve? That's strange, because I only count 800,000. http://www.globalfirepower.com/activ...y-manpower.asp

Are you talking about untrained military manpower? If you are, yes they have quite a bit of untrained military manpower at their disposal. What good do you think that would do if their equipment, vehicles, and airplanes get destroyed? Even if they DID have tanks, jets, and other vehicles left, how effective do you think they could be used with men who have little or no training? Again, I am NOT saying that China would just roll over and give up.
__________________
Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken
Quad4_72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 06:03 AM   #122
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
With a withering assertion like that you must be right Dont let anything like proof get in the way
Your claim, you explain how your analogy works.

Because I dure as hell don't see how one oppressive dictatorial government propping up an even more oppressive dictatorial government in order to prevent an imaginary invasion by a modern liberal democracy has any similarities at all to the relationship between the US and Canada.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:02 AM   #123
A Laughing Baby
A baby. Goo goo ga ga
 
A Laughing Baby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,987
Originally Posted by dtugg View Post
Compared to the USA it isn't even close to technologically advanced.
This is not true, at least in terms of technology required to win limited ground that is of strategic importance to China (i.e. taiwan).
__________________
Plorate, omnes virgines!!
A Laughing Baby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:14 AM   #124
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
And we all know the North Koreans will never expect the US to destroy their bridges, blow up their railways or destroy their communications infrastructure

You have yet to show what the NK can do to counter an attack other than to say that they can and we are under estimating NK. What exactly can they do when we destroy all communications, roads, bridges, and rail. What can they do to counter the air attack? How about naval power? Do you really think they have a chance in hell against a carrier battle group?

So is it your assertion is that they could wage asymmetrical warfare similar to Afghanistan? There is no centralized power in Afghanistan like there is in NK. We are fighting tribal peoples whos allegiance is to whos paying them top dollar quite different from the central power structure of NK. In fact NK is much closer to Saddam and Iraq in that regard. NK people are not allowed to think independently so what happens when the dear leader can no longer give orders?
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:15 AM   #125
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Your claim, you explain how your analogy works.

Because I dure as hell don't see how one oppressive dictatorial government propping up an even more oppressive dictatorial government in order to prevent an imaginary invasion by a modern liberal democracy has any similarities at all to the relationship between the US and Canada.
So it is your contention, only certain 'types' of governments can have special relationships?

I suppose the two nations fighting a combined war against the Japanese for nearly 35 years counts for nothing, or that the Korean government lived in exile in Manchuria for a fair chunck of that time counts for nothing either

But it gets better, the original Kim was a Soviet puppet, put in place because of his lack of ties with China. This made no difference to China and North Korea's special relationships

Within three years, despite Stalin vetoing the attack, China gave unconditional support to North Korea during the Korean War. This led to it own range of problems between the Soviets and the Chinese for years to come

As recently as August 2010 - both the Chinese and North Korean leaders gave very extensive speeches regarding the 'special relationship' you dont seem to know anything about.
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:21 AM   #126
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by keale View Post
You have yet to show what the NK can do to counter an attack other than to say that they can and we are under estimating NK. What exactly can they do when we destroy all communications, roads, bridges, and rail. What can they do to counter the air attack? How about naval power? Do you really think they have a chance in hell against a carrier battle group?
Who has said those attacks wont be successfull. It is how you train your troops for what will follow.

And if the Australian Army is smart enough to design its battle doctrine around just this type of event, I am sure the NK are equally smart enough to figure it out as well.

Here is a list of other countries who figured it out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay-behind
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:23 AM   #127
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by A Laughing Baby View Post
This is not true, at least in terms of technology required to win limited ground that is of strategic importance to China (i.e. taiwan).

Taiwan is well armed and trained for that not to mention China is at a disadvantage in the air never mind that we would help them out.

That being said it would never happen China has too much to lose.
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:25 AM   #128
caniswalensis
Master Poster
 
caniswalensis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,561
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSXNJ...eature=related
__________________
"...The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them -- the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you're sensible, you'll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status." - Carl Sagan

Last edited by caniswalensis; 30th November 2010 at 09:29 AM.
caniswalensis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:36 AM   #129
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
Who has said those attacks wont be successfull. It is how you train your troops for what will follow.
Why on earth would they train their troops to deal with a collapse of command structures? That's dangerous. It violates the fiction that North Korea is strong and we are weak, but more importantly, cultivating independence of thought and action among those with weapons is the LAST thing a totalitarian and oppressive government is going to want to do. That's how you encourage a coup.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:37 AM   #130
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
So it is your contention, only certain 'types' of governments can have special relationships?

I suppose the two nations fighting a combined war against the Japanese for nearly 35 years counts for nothing, or that the Korean government lived in exile in Manchuria for a fair chunck of that time counts for nothing either

But it gets better, the original Kim was a Soviet puppet, put in place because of his lack of ties with China. This made no difference to China and North Korea's special relationships

Within three years, despite Stalin vetoing the attack, China gave unconditional support to North Korea during the Korean War. This led to it own range of problems between the Soviets and the Chinese for years to come

As recently as August 2010 - both the Chinese and North Korean leaders gave very extensive speeches regarding the 'special relationship' you dont seem to know anything about.
That's as may be, but China now is not the China of 1950. China now, to be honest, has more in common with South Korea than it has with North Korea. North Korea hasn't change in 60 years...China has, markedly.

They won't risk their economy propping up the north if the north go off on one. They can't afford to, for their own internal stability.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 09:41 AM   #131
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
Who has said those attacks wont be successfull. It is how you train your troops for what will follow.

And if the Australian Army is smart enough to design its battle doctrine around just this type of event, I am sure the NK are equally smart enough to figure it out as well.

Here is a list of other countries who figured it out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay-behind

Heres your list

* Auxiliary Units (United Kingdom)
* Operation Gladio (Italy, although working in many countries)
o O&I (Netherlands)
o Lochos Oreinon Katadromon, or LOK (Greece)
o OWSGV (Austria)
o Plan Bleu, La Rose des Vents, and Arc-en-ciel (France)
o ROC (Norway)
o SDRA8 and STC/Mob (Belgium)
o Bund Deutscher Jugend - Technischer Dienst, or TD BJD (Germany)
* Nihtilä-Haahti plan (Finland)
* Projekt-26 (P-26, Switzerland)
* Werwolf (Nazi Germany)
* Regional Force Surveillance Units (Australia), non-secret units of the Royal Australian Corps of Infantry with officially acknowledged 'stay-behind' duties.
* Informationsbyrån ('IB') in Sweden, possibly.


All of those countries are a far far far cry from NK. So what happens when NK central power is destroyed? Do they keep fighting or do they surrender hoping for a better life in the south? Keep in mind the vast majority of NK is living in dirt. NK has the resources to maintain their iron fist power over their people what will the people do when that power is gone? Were not talking about a western democracy like Australia where the people like their system were talking about NK where thinking the wrong things will get you killed.
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 10:14 AM   #132
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,546
Originally Posted by Wolfman View Post
Hell...it could be a godsend for them. A war starts. The U.S. gets involved. China gets involved. Using the pretext of war on their border (and the inevitable fact that N. Korea will directly request military support from the Chinese ally, making everything 'legal', ie. its not an invasion), China moves into N. Korea. Once there, their military quickly takes over, pushing back S. Korea and the U.S.
That's a bit optimistic, don't you think? You know, the army of South Korea is over twice as large as the US force that took out Iraq in a fortnight, and not significantly worse off in equipment. Their air force is about 40% the size of Chinese air force, and that can be quickly brought to superiority with a few US carriers. NK air force is a joke, and probably more of a threat to it's pilots than the enemy.

Aside of the land war, there is the sea war at stake. Chinese navy and commercial navy would be swept from the seas in a week - most certainly before they would be able to declare "North Korean aggression was over".

All this aside, the economic impact of the war would be cataclysmic for the West, and that would pale compared to what it would do to China. It would likely end their meteoric rise to power for at least a few decades, and throw a few hundred million people back into poverty for good. Hardly a situation Chinese leadership wants, I suspect, and certainly no godsend.

This isn't the world of 1950s, where you can actually wage major wars. The economic impact alone is more than enough to ensure a war between two major powers is all but impossible.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 11:09 AM   #133
Matt78
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 40
Originally Posted by keale View Post
Perhaps they really do have a death wish
Their head of state, statistically, shouldn't live too much longer, so maybe he doesn't care.
Matt78 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 11:10 AM   #134
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by Tolls View Post
That's as may be, but China now is not the China of 1950. China now, to be honest, has more in common with South Korea than it has with North Korea. North Korea hasn't change in 60 years...China has, markedly.

They won't risk their economy propping up the north if the north go off on one. They can't afford to, for their own internal stability.
You're right. China in 1950 had just completed the revolution and despite the fact they had no heavy weapons or mobile armor they still went to war and pushed the UN Forces all the way back.

The current rulers may not be Mao but it's still a totalitarian regime. They have no problem using force on their own people when they see the need and they don't give a crap what the rest of the world thinks.

If the Chinese feel it is in their interest to defend NK, they will do it. Do they want to? I don't think so, but brinksmanship can only be played so far with the Chinese. If backed into a corner they will defend what they see as their best interest and Wal-Mart be damned.

They will not sit by and let North Korea be attacked. They will do their best to get that fruitcake Kim to back off, but there is no way they will tolerate a South Korean and/or American invasion of the North.

Here's the scary part, China may be a country willing to use their nukes. I don't know if any American president will retaliate with nukes unless US territory itself was attacked.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 11:25 AM   #135
Captain.Sassy
Master Poster
 
Captain.Sassy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,236
"China's exports have indeed grown at a 25% annual rate, over twice the rate of growth in GDP. Since the value added by exports presently contributes about 12% to China's GDP, this means that, in recent years, export growth has contributed about 3% of the 11%-13% growth rate in GDP. This is an important component. However, these numbers also show that about three-quarters of the growth rate in China's GDP has come from domestic spending and domestic investment. "

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbi...420_581968.htm

So China is not as dependent on the US as some would make it out to be.

I also think that some estimates of how easy it would be for the US/SK to defeat China in a war are perhaps a touch optimistic.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat
Why on earth would they train their troops to deal with a collapse of command structures? That's dangerous. It violates the fiction that North Korea is strong and we are weak, but more importantly, cultivating independence of thought and action among those with weapons is the LAST thing a totalitarian and oppressive government is going to want to do. That's how you encourage a coup.
Interesting claim. Do you have anything to support it?
__________________
Evolution
a poem

As luck would have it,
people.
Captain.Sassy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 11:51 AM   #136
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,546
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Here's the scary part, China may be a country willing to use their nukes. I don't know if any American president will retaliate with nukes unless US territory itself was attacked.
Any country that has nukes has to be ready to use them, else they're just a waste of money.

That said, I suspect that a limited nuclear strike may be a way to go with China, if it decided to be stupid and used nuclear weapons. China is not the Soviet Union in may ways, and that includes their much smaller nuclear deterrent.

One interesting aspect worthy of study would be to see the reaction of China of South Korea declaring they're withdrawing from the NNPT. I imagine it would be quite a headache.

That said, if wikileaks is correct, China would perfer a unified Korea under Seoul to maintaining status quo. If that report is accurate, and the opinion penetrates sufficiently deep into Chinese leadership, that may be the endgame for North Korea. They would likely fight like a cornered dog and the situation would be extremely dangerous, but it has the best chance of a positive end result in the long term of all scenarios that I can see.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 11:56 AM   #137
Captain.Sassy
Master Poster
 
Captain.Sassy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,236
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
if wikileaks is correct, China would perfer a unified Korea under Seoul to maintaining status quo
I believe that much (not all though) of the wikileaks stuff on China's NK position was based on American diplomats reporting what their South Korean counterparts had told them. South Korea may have an interest in over-selling China's displeasure.
__________________
Evolution
a poem

As luck would have it,
people.
Captain.Sassy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 12:06 PM   #138
anduin
Critical Thinker
 
anduin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 259
Thanks to Wikileaks, now we know that the Chinese are tired of North Korea, and that they prefer peaceful solutions. It is unlikely that the Chinese will assist North Korea in case of war, particularly one that NK starts without provocation. It is not in their best economic interest, they are doing fine with the status quo.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...-china-us-buck
__________________
"Multiple exclamation marks are a sure sign of a diseased mind."
Terry Pratchett
anduin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 12:22 PM   #139
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by Captain.Sassy View Post
"China's exports have indeed grown at a 25% annual rate, over twice the rate of growth in GDP. Since the value added by exports presently contributes about 12% to China's GDP, this means that, in recent years, export growth has contributed about 3% of the 11%-13% growth rate in GDP. This is an important component. However, these numbers also show that about three-quarters of the growth rate in China's GDP has come from domestic spending and domestic investment. "

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbi...420_581968.htm

So China is not as dependent on the US as some would make it out to be.

I also think that some estimates of how easy it would be for the US/SK to defeat China in a war are perhaps a touch optimistic.



Interesting claim. Do you have anything to support it?

Well its reality.....can you cite what military assets NK and China could trot out that wouldnt get shot down immediately. China is at least decades behind current US platforms hell their not even on par with our last generation of weapons in land sea or air.

I wanted to add that any conflict would be bad news for China and the US. People like to think that Chinese products are limited to Wal Mart which is far from reality. Just about everything that you can buy these days was made in China for the simple reason that they can get it to us at cheaper prices than anyone else. Ive worked in retail and wholesale and you can beat China in the price game its amazing how cheaply they can make stuff. Chinese businesses are very very aggressive and will undercut anyone and everyone.

Last edited by keale; 30th November 2010 at 12:45 PM.
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 12:28 PM   #140
dudalb
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,025
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
That's a bit optimistic, don't you think? You know, the army of South Korea is over twice as large as the US force that took out Iraq in a fortnight, and not significantly worse off in equipment. Their air force is about 40% the size of Chinese air force, and that can be quickly brought to superiority with a few US carriers. NK air force is a joke, and probably more of a threat to it's pilots than the enemy.

Aside of the land war, there is the sea war at stake. Chinese navy and commercial navy would be swept from the seas in a week - most certainly before they would be able to declare "North Korean aggression was over".

All this aside, the economic impact of the war would be cataclysmic for the West, and that would pale compared to what it would do to China. It would likely end their meteoric rise to power for at least a few decades, and throw a few hundred million people back into poverty for good. Hardly a situation Chinese leadership wants, I suspect, and certainly no godsend.

This isn't the world of 1950s, where you can actually wage major wars. The economic impact alone is more than enough to ensure a war between two major powers is all but impossible.

McHrozni
Somehow I suspect that China does not want the total mess that is North Korea on Their hands.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 12:30 PM   #141
dudalb
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,025
Originally Posted by anduin View Post
Thanks to Wikileaks, now we know that the Chinese are tired of North Korea, and that they prefer peaceful solutions. It is unlikely that the Chinese will assist North Korea in case of war, particularly one that NK starts without provocation. It is not in their best economic interest, they are doing fine with the status quo.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010...-china-us-buck
I also think the Chinese Have also come to the conclusion that the current NK government is simply out of control and cannot be trusted.
It is amusing to see the apologists for North Korea in this section go through the paces, though.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 01:14 PM   #142
Captain.Sassy
Master Poster
 
Captain.Sassy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,236
Originally Posted by keale View Post
Well its reality.....can you cite what military assets NK and China could trot out that wouldnt get shot down immediately. China is at least decades behind current US platforms hell their not even on par with our last generation of weapons in land sea or air.
Well, I mean, there are reports of the Chinese improving their capabilities with submarines; Chinese subs surfaced undetected close to the USS kittyhawk twice in recent years (officially 'by accident', but generally interpreted as a demonstration of their abilities). China's also been working on missiles for sea denial, both cruise and ballistic. US naval losses in a confrontation might be higher than you think.

As for North Korea, the real worry that has been pointed out here a few times isn't necessarily their tanks, planes, etc., but rather their strategic deterrent (not necessarily nuclear). If war breaks out, they'll do their best (probably) to inflict maximum damage on SK (maybe japan too) in a short period of time.
__________________
Evolution
a poem

As luck would have it,
people.
Captain.Sassy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 01:37 PM   #143
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by Captain.Sassy View Post
Well, I mean, there are reports of the Chinese improving their capabilities with submarines; Chinese subs surfaced undetected close to the USS kittyhawk twice in recent years (officially 'by accident', but generally interpreted as a demonstration of their abilities). China's also been working on missiles for sea denial, both cruise and ballistic. US naval losses in a confrontation might be higher than you think.

As for North Korea, the real worry that has been pointed out here a few times isn't necessarily their tanks, planes, etc., but rather their strategic deterrent (not necessarily nuclear). If war breaks out, they'll do their best (probably) to inflict maximum damage on SK (maybe japan too) in a short period of time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

Look at that link thats 40 year old technology dont you think that we have come a bit farther in that time? I have no doubt that China or NK could possibly come up with some small victories but the overall war against vastly superior weapons platforms would be crushing.
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 02:11 PM   #144
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by keale View Post

All of those countries are a far far far cry from NK. So what happens when NK central power is destroyed? Do they keep fighting or do they surrender hoping for a better life in the south? Keep in mind the vast majority of NK is living in dirt. NK has the resources to maintain their iron fist power over their people what will the people do when that power is gone? Were not talking about a western democracy like Australia where the people like their system were talking about NK where thinking the wrong things will get you killed.
So what is your explanation for the Paritsans in the Ukraine during WW2
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 02:13 PM   #145
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by keale View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

Look at that link thats 40 year old technology dont you think that we have come a bit farther in that time? I have no doubt that China or NK could possibly come up with some small victories but the overall war against vastly superior weapons platforms would be crushing.
Umm so I have miss read history. The US won in Vietnam?
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 02:16 PM   #146
Captain.Sassy
Master Poster
 
Captain.Sassy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,236
NEat, never heard of phalanx before thanks

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008...-cant-stop-ch/

http://project2049.net/documents/chi...ssile_asbm.pdf
__________________
Evolution
a poem

As luck would have it,
people.
Captain.Sassy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 02:21 PM   #147
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
Umm so I have miss read history. The US won in Vietnam?

If you really think that it would come to jungle warfare like Vietnam you may have a point but since SK would be the invading army what is your point?
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 02:40 PM   #148
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by keale View Post
If you really think that it would come to jungle warfare like Vietnam you may have a point but since SK would be the invading army what is your point?
How about you stick to the point you actually made - which was

I have no doubt that China or NK could possibly come up with some small victories but the overall war against vastly superior weapons platforms would be crushing.

So why didn't this prediction hold true for Vietnam? The only area the Vietnamese got close to parady with the US was in aircraft, and that was only with the handful of Soviet MIG pilots. Yet for 8 years the US was unable to defeat the NV forces...why?

And the same question can be asked of the Korean War. Tanks dominate the battlefield for the first 6 months of the war - then fade to a secondary role for the next few years....what changed?
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 03:45 PM   #149
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Captain.Sassy View Post
Well, I mean, there are reports of the Chinese improving their capabilities with submarines; Chinese subs surfaced undetected close to the USS kittyhawk twice in recent years (officially 'by accident', but generally interpreted as a demonstration of their abilities).
Officially, anyway. Why would we let them know if they were detected? Far better to let them think they were undetected. I can't imagine the Navy ever saying "oh yeah, we heard that thing a hundred miles away".
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 03:53 PM   #150
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
So why didn't this prediction hold true for Vietnam? The only area the Vietnamese got close to parady with the US was in aircraft, and that was only with the handful of Soviet MIG pilots. Yet for 8 years the US was unable to defeat the NV forces...why?
Because we insisted on fighting the war the NVA wanted to fight, the only one they could win. And it didn't help that the ARVN was by and large ineffective.

S. Korea has a very effective military.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 03:58 PM   #151
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,575
Originally Posted by Captain.Sassy View Post
Interesting claim. Do you have anything to support it?
Nothing directly, but it's the logical inference from what we do know. Information is incredibly tightly controlled in North Korea. People are constantly bombarded with propaganda not just about how good Kim is and how evil we are, but also how strong they are and how pathetic and weak we are. Do a google search and you can see some examples of the message the regime is trying to create. Or for an example I found particularly useful for illuminating the reality inversion that goes on, this article claims that North Korea tells its people that food aid shipments are really reparations that the US sends to North Korea because we're scared of them.

Totalitarian regimes always need to create a fictitious reality in order to survive. And in North Korea, being especially brutal, the official party line is especially removed from reality. Nothing is ever allowed to contradict that narrative. And an understanding of what we can actually do to them would most definitely contradict what they've always been told. Now, it's possible that soldiers suspect that we're much stronger than Kim says we are. Truth can leak in, often times merely under the suspicion that reality is the opposite of what is claimed.

So let's suppose that all the soldiers secretly suspect the truth (I'm sure some do, but I doubt it's all of them). That alone is likely to undermine morale significantly in the event of an actual conflict. But even if it didn't, the command and control issues remain. Because regardless of what soldiers actually know, nothing about the truth can be publicly acknowledged. Which means the military cannot train to deal with reality, because to train for it is to acknowledge it. And an army that doesn't train for how to act independently, an army that is instead always told to do exactly what your superiors tell you to do (because no totalitarian regime has ever run their army differently), won't be able to act independently once those command structures are eliminated. Even if they know it's going to happen, that knowledge isn't enough to be effective. You need the training, you need the procedures in place, or as an organization it's all going to come apart at the seams.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 04:55 PM   #152
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
How about you stick to the point you actually made - which was

I have no doubt that China or NK could possibly come up with some small victories but the overall war against vastly superior weapons platforms would be crushing.

So why didn't this prediction hold true for Vietnam? The only area the Vietnamese got close to parady with the US was in aircraft, and that was only with the handful of Soviet MIG pilots. Yet for 8 years the US was unable to defeat the NV forces...why?

And the same question can be asked of the Korean War. Tanks dominate the battlefield for the first 6 months of the war - then fade to a secondary role for the next few years....what changed?
Again what part of we wont be going into a ground war did you miss? Thats on SK to do the work
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:07 PM   #153
keale
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 813
Originally Posted by Captain.Sassy View Post

Russian technology. Impressive what they can do with so little resources having said that the Russians tend to overstate the abilities of their weapons systems while on the other hand the US tends to tell you as little as possible.
Take a look at the SR22 the actual top speed capabilities of that plane is still classified to this day and the Russians never could replicate the that plane nor could they figure out how to shoot it down. 50+ years later the Russians still like to trumpet their latest capabilities while the US just doesnt say much of anything.
keale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:22 PM   #154
Nosi
Master Poster
 
Nosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
I would not expect much from the railway system. The have about 5000 miles of lines, virtually all dating prior to WW2 - and if defectors etc are to be believed much of it has fallen out of use due to lack of up keep
Sounds like all the Kim's eggs are in the nuclear basket.
__________________
__________

Hiding from the
Nosi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:25 PM   #155
Nosi
Master Poster
 
Nosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by keale View Post
The majority of which would be eliminated with precision guided weapons in short order. Yeah they would inflict damage but im just guessing NK gets smacked in 24 hours.
They were saying that about Iraq. We're still getting grief from that quarter.
__________________
__________

Hiding from the
Nosi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:28 PM   #156
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by keale View Post
Russian technology. Impressive what they can do with so little resources having said that the Russians tend to overstate the abilities of their weapons systems while on the other hand the US tends to tell you as little as possible.
Take a look at the SR22 the actual top speed capabilities of that plane is still classified to this day and the Russians never could replicate the that plane nor could they figure out how to shoot it down. 50+ years later the Russians still like to trumpet their latest capabilities while the US just doesnt say much of anything.

I assume you mean the SR-71:



Because this is the SR22



dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:29 PM   #157
Nosi
Master Poster
 
Nosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by keale View Post
Yup there isnt an air force in the world that matches up with US capabilities. Seriously we spend stupid out of your mind money on RND for these planes no other country spends even half of what we spend on the most advanced technology. China is years behind our last generation of fighters never mind the 5th gen F-22 and F-35
Our being all that and a bag of chips didn't keep China from crashing US wargames via submarine. It's not always the size of your tool, but how you use it.
__________________
__________

Hiding from the
Nosi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:31 PM   #158
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by Nosi View Post
They were saying that about Iraq. We're still getting grief from that quarter.
The Iraqi military was smashed in very quick order.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:32 PM   #159
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Nosi View Post
They were saying that about Iraq. We're still getting grief from that quarter.
Saddam's army folded rather quickly.

Are you suggesting China will send its troops into N. Korea disquised as civilians and planting mines along the roads?
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2010, 05:33 PM   #160
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by dtugg View Post
Because this is the SR22



Looks can be deceiving...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.