06-26-2008, 07:12 PM
I'll read the link you sent about sanctions effectiveness...I just haven't yet.
Here's the link I promised about the little Korean problem....scroll down a bit and read the article US OUT from this blog. And click on any of the links within the story especially about property rights issues....you'll always find the closest truth on alternative news sources...once you sort through the B.S.
I've found some very good, truthful news on this forum....but it's not always accurate. You just have to us the B.S. detector.
OK...read the article
1st. I didn't really see any relation to the progress related to the effectiveness of sanctions.
2nd. I think this kind of makes my point that it's up to S. Korean government to work out it's differences with N.K.
The US may actually hurt the process by being a mediator nobody wants. I still believe bilateral talks will be most effective between the two.
Last edited by Molon Labe; 06-26-2008 at 07:19 PM. Reason: update..read the article.
06-27-2008, 01:24 AM
What a suprise....Bush the magic Globalist. I just heard Jerry Doyle talking about this on his radio show...this is flat out disgusting. 2002, they were part of the Axis of Evil, suddenly they're not so bad?"Don't vote. It only encourages the bastards." -PJ O'Roarke
06-27-2008, 04:44 AM
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Woodland Park, Colorado, United States
Koreans are anti-American beef not because of a real Mad cow disease but a manufacured one. The internet was flooded with spam and propaganda and the media was a willing accomplice. Sound familiar? 300,000,000 Americans eat beef and not a single case of mad cow. The Koreas were told that they were more susceptible to getting the disease, and they CHOOSE to believe that lie.
The farmers are anti-American beef import because the average price of beef in Korea is about $10.00 for a 100 grams. Why would they want American beef flooding the market that is ten times less? If anything, Koreans ought to worry about the food they eat. The cows spend their lives in a pin slightly bigger than they are. The pins are filthy and would never be allowed in the USA.
Last edited by AmPat; 06-27-2008 at 04:46 AM.
06-27-2008, 08:38 AMI like to shoot people with my CANON.
gatorGuest06-27-2008, 09:14 AM
Also, each person in the US spends about $2,000 per year per person for military. The South Koreans spend a little over $1,000 each.
Why should should the US provide military aid to a country when the people don't have the same burden for their own security as the US? Especially when we are running a deficit and have to borrow the money in order to give it to the South Koreans.
I really don't understand why we have troops in South Korea nowadays.
Don't you think that the US troops in South Korea could better serve our country protecting the US - Mexico border? For many years the misson of the 4/7th Cav was to protect the border. Now they are in Korea. Don't you think we should send them back to our own DMZ?
06-27-2008, 10:27 AM
- Join Date
- May 2008
pulled out the National Guard from our border, I think that's a pipe dream.
Maybe once we get a government that cares about protecting our borders, we can discuss it. Until then, it's not a ripe issue.
06-27-2008, 10:34 AMAt Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
06-27-2008, 10:51 AM
And just if...and it's a big if...... the S.K. lost, and the peninsula were unified under communism....then that would no more affect us than when the worst case scenario happened in 1974 in Vietnam. The world still went on. Let the despots starve themselves into oblivion.
And besides..before either would allow themselves to be occupied they would both use their nuclear weapons. There is no reason to believe the standoff won't continue without U.S. troops present.
I'm not really sure I believe the Korean peninsula has much interest value (meaning resources) to the U.S. beyond half of it being a liberal democracy.
My point is that we underestimate the S.K. and Japanese ability to take control of their destiny in the region. And let's not forget the Russians haven't hibranated from the world stage. The security of that region is in their interests as well. IMO...They all can very much handle the Koreans. We give ourselves way too much credit that everybody needs us.
Last edited by Molon Labe; 06-27-2008 at 11:31 AM.Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown
The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
06-27-2008, 11:40 AM
- Join Date
- May 2008
gatorGuest06-27-2008, 12:23 PM
Now that the Cold War is over then I don't think we have the security need anymore.
I think by the 1980s the South Koreans were able to handle their own defense without American troops being garrisoned in the country. It was probably that way in the 1970s. I saw the South Koreans kicking ass in Vietnam.
We probably should have removed all American troops by the 1990s.
We can be allies with South Korea and help them out if they get in trouble but I see no reason why we need thousands of American combat troops in South Korea. Especially nowadays seeing the dismayed condition of readiness in the North Korean forces.
I certainly don’t see any massive arming of the North Koreans by the Soviets or Chinese like it was in 1950.
Like Cuba North Korea has been abandoned by the International Communists. Not much of a threat to the US. Let us use our money elsewhere.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|