Joint Military Exercises with S. Korea

[Sweet Rabbit]

A major international flashpoint and somehow the USA is involved..................no change there then.

Whilst North Korea's actions are cause for concern there's still no need for the USA to stick their nose into someone else's affairs yet again as it'll inevitably make the situation worse especially if China decide to back the North.

if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking german right about now.....

 

[BadMoon]

if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking german right about now.....

 

[bcm77]

if it wasn't for us, you'd be speaking german right about now.....

Correction. I wouldn't even be here because the Germans would probably have shot my father because he is disabled.

I sometimes wonder whether that would have been a better outcome as I wouldn't have to live in a world dominated by arrogant bullies like America who risk world peace every time they get involved in other countries affairs.

One day they'll inevitably pick a fight with someone who's capable of fighting back ie China and they'll get a much deserved kick in the balls. The only sad thing will be the fact I'll never get to see it as the UK/Europe will get wiped out in the first strike.

 

[karamazov80]

Yes, the U.S. has picked on weaker enemies in the past for one reason or another, because they could. I'm sure the UK would never do such a thing *cough*Faulklands*cough*

 

[BadMoon]

Correction. I wouldn't even be here because the Germans would probably have shot my father because he is disabled.

I sometimes wonder whether that would have been a better outcome as I wouldn't have to live in a world dominated by arrogant bullies like America who risk world peace every time they get involved in other countries affairs.

One day they'll inevitably pick a fight with someone who's capable of fighting back ie China and they'll get a much deserved kick in the balls. The only sad thing will be the fact I'll never get to see it as the UK/Europe will get wiped out in the first strike.

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever read on this board.

 

[bcm77]

Yes, the U.S. has picked on weaker enemies in the past for one reason or another, because they could. I'm sure the UK would never do such a thing *cough*Faulklands*cough*

The UK's record is hardly perfect but compared to the USA we're practically saints.

A big percentage of US citizens couldn't even find the countries they go to war with on a map but they'll still sit round the TV cheering on Team USA as they "kick ass".

 

[karamazov80]

The UK is hardly perfect but compared to the USA come off much better in the modern era.

Those who can, do

The U.S. was the "global hegemon" for much of the post-WWII period. Europe was unable and unwilling to take a leadership role after cannibalizing itself in two consecutive world wars, so the U.S. did, and in the process established a peaceful international order and international financial stability. Unfortunately, maintaining international order doesn't work by sitting on the sidelines and letting others do as they will. To take another British example here, look no further than Neville Chamberlain's behavior at Munich. That worked out really well, didn't it?

International isolationism is not possible for effective world leaders. The U.S. is still the most powerful leader in the world, and has to become involved in other states' affairs to prevent the kind of international conflict that Europe previously perpetuated for centuries. Others want us to. South Korea wants us involved, Europe wants us involved, Japan wants us involved as, I would suspect, does China and Russia. Because the U.S. helps to ensure peace. It is overly simplistic and more than a bit naive to say that the U.S. just picks on weak states for political gains, and backs away from any real challengers. European anti-Americanism is no more sophisticated or fact-based than the jingoistic pro-American rah rah stuff you are referring to.

 

[bcm77]

Those who can, do

The U.S. was the "global hegemon" for much of the post-WWII period. Europe was unable and unwilling to take a leadership role after cannibalizing itself in two consecutive world wars, so the U.S. did, and in the process established a peaceful international order and international financial stability. Unfortunately, maintaining international order doesn't work by sitting on the sidelines and letting others do as they will. To take another British example here, look no further than Neville Chamberlain's behavior at Munich. That worked out really well, didn't it?

International isolationism is not possible for effective world leaders. The U.S. is still the most powerful leader in the world, and has to become involved in other states' affairs to prevent the kind of international conflict that Europe previously perpetuated for centuries. Others want us to. South Korea wants us involved, Europe wants us involved, Japan wants us involved as, I would suspect, does China and Russia. Because the U.S. helps to ensure peace. It is overly simplistic and more than a bit naive to say that the U.S. just picks on weak states for political gains, and backs away from any real challengers. European anti-Americanism is no more sophisticated or fact-based than the jingoistic pro-American rah rah stuff you are referring to.

I object to the UK's relationship with the USA because it makes us targets for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and an inevitable recipient of any long range missiles from rogue states like Iran & North Korea because they'll want to send a message to their allies as well as the main enemy.

I also tire of the arrogant "if you aren't with us, you're against us" mentality that is displayed by many US citizens in the collecting community and elsewhere.

 

[Darkseed]

they'll still sit round the TV cheering on Team USA as they "kick ass".

Your general observations of Americans are way off. I don't agree with every action taken by the government matter of fact far from it. However, I also understand our perceived role in the world whether we (Americans) like it or not.

When the government decides to send family, friends and colleagues in harms way, I hope for a quick and decisive action to bring them home safely. If that qualifies me as Team USA then so be it. Beside a few loose cannons around the globe who really wants war

 

[quadcent]

wow things are still quite calm in here, but either way i think everyone can hope for a peaceful outcome to this situation.
as for the states being the go to power, i for one would more than welcome them if someone started to invade us (like that would ever happen since all anyone has to do is buy what they want from us)

 

[fosing]

I object to the UK's relationship with the USA because it makes us targets for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and an inevitable recipient of any long range missiles from rogue states like Iran & North Korea because they'll want to send a message to their allies as well as the main enemy.

I also tire of the arrogant "if you aren't with us, you're against us" mentality that is displayed by many US citizens in the collecting community and elsewhere.

the way of the SITH.
...religious fundamentalists too.
...ALIEN ELITES.

but really...
you sound like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flBpsyFbEOs

 

[karamazov80]

Alan Moore understood one of the most basic facts about one's nationalist perspective--where you stand is where you sit.

 

[316what]

Correction. I wouldn't even be here because the Germans would probably have shot my father because he is disabled.

I sometimes wonder whether that would have been a better outcome as I wouldn't have to live in a world dominated by arrogant bullies like America who risk world peace every time they get involved in other countries affairs.

One day they'll inevitably pick a fight with someone who's capable of fighting back ie China and they'll get a much deserved kick in the balls. The only sad thing will be the fact I'll never get to see it as the UK/Europe will get wiped out in the first strike.

As Col Jessup said: just say Thank You and be on your merry way.

 

[316what]

The UK's record is hardly perfect but compared to the USA we're practically saints.

*cough* Revolutionary War *cough*
*cough* Ireland *cough*
*cough* Scotland *cough*
*cough* Crusades *cough*

Shall I continue?

 

[BadMoon]

*cough* Revolutionary War *cough*
*cough* Ireland *cough*
*cough* Scotland *cough*
*cough* Crusades *cough*

Shall I continue?

No need to continue. Someone just doesn't know their history. And I dont mean you.

 

[The Ween]

I object to the UK's relationship with the USA because it makes us targets for terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and an inevitable recipient of any long range missiles from rogue states like Iran & North Korea because they'll want to send a message to their allies as well as the main enemy.

I also tire of the arrogant "if you aren't with us, you're against us" mentality that is displayed by many US citizens in the collecting community and elsewhere.

You're already targeted and it has nothing to do with the US. They hate everyone in the free world that don't believe as they do.

Take a good look around you in the UK. They're all around you. Take a good look at France and see what's going on there. If you think that standing back and staying out of the ____ is going to keep you safe, you have another thing coming.

There is no other country in the world that has other nations' backs like the US, either financially or militarily. ____, we even give aid to countries who hate us when they have natural disasters and such.

I would have to wonder what would happen in the rest of the world if the US just gave a big FU to everyone else and turned their backs, closed their borders and just minded their own business. To be honest, WE'D be better off in the long run, but I'm betting the rest of the world wouldn't, with the exception of Canada, since they're our 51st state anyway, they just don't realize it.

Actually, Canada is like our sister country.

 

[bcm77]

No need to continue. Someone just doesn't know their history. And I dont mean you.

Oddly enough stuff that happened hundreds of years before I was born has no meaning to me. It's the here & now that is my concern.

As for Ireland, I reckon the UK should steal all the Guiness then let 'em have the country back and leave them to it as there's little else they have of any use.

The US only backs other nations if they think they can get something out of it. If the crap really hit the fan the UK and other "allies" would be considered expendable.

 

[devilof76]

What have we ever got out of a country we've helped except for an obligation to provide foreign aid?

Oh, and Hot Toys figures.

 

[bcm77]

What have we ever got out of a country we've helped except for an obligation to provide foreign aid?

Oh, and Hot Toys figures.

The ability to brag to the rest of the world about how benevolent & wonderful they are to anyone that will listen....................the reality is far different.

 

[Mr. EcKo]

Gonna go with no. North Korea has to understand that the rest of us won't let them continue to attack the south with impunity, so I think this action makes sense given that economic and diplomatic sanctions don't mean anything to North Korea. This action is meant to demonstrate resolve.

However, I cannot imagine it escalating into war for two reasons: 1) the respective allied states that would end up facing off against one another; and 2) the nuclear bomb. In a worst case scenario, war would bring China into it against the U.S., South Korea, and Japan (and possibly Europe). Too many economic interests at stake, and though it wouldn't make a lot of sense for China to turn against all its major trading partners in the pursuit of defending an ally it could really do without, the U.S. is probably not gonna take that risk by attempting to escalate a conflict with North Korea.


Then, there is too much risk with the nuke question. Potentially mutually assured destruction is not an option for South Korea or Japan (it is unlikely that North Korea has the means to attack the U.S. with an ICBM, or that it has the nuclear arsenal to do serious damage to the country as a whole even if it did--but for its small neighbors. . .?). Even if the Kim regime is irrational, the other actors understand the risk and will act accordingly.

Ideally, a clandestine military force would get in there and take out the Kim regime, including the heads of their military. . .and the U.S. could place the blame on, say, Israel, who would feel little in the way of repercussions for such an action. But not an easy thing to do in a true paranoid, authoritarian police state.

wow .......man you should write books