Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Aug 9, 2003.
Well, my unsolicited advice is to do it in April. Korean summers ain't as hot as Korean winters are cold. I found occupation duty there to be a miserable bitch, but that was nothing at all compared to what the guys went through at Chosin Reservoir.
But the boys won't be home by Christmas...
Well, I would say take about 10 F-117A's, and 4 B-2 Freedom's, and just get rid of the nuclear plants. Of course if you do that, then the North will invade the South. Now, fact is the approx 40,000 US troops there would be sacrificial lambs. UNLESS we were to use a tactical nuke on the North's military positions. Also, if we had three carrier groups there, there would be ample air support. But, N. Korea is not Iraq. They have many Mig-29's and SU-27 Flankers, and the pilots know how to fly them. We would win the war, but it would come at a much higher price than what we have seen in the gulf.
Are you really advocating an invasion of the DPRK as sound US policy at this point? Or is this more of your special brand of tongue-in-cheek sarcasm?
You do realize that most of our military is committed elsewhere right now, and that no matter how badly some may want to do this, unless we reinstitute the draft or somehow drum up a couple extra divisions of soldiers voluntarily, the force structure just isn't there right now. Part of the downside of having invaded Iraq I guess.
Well, most of the reserves are still available, and we could redistribute the forces. Leave the majority in Afghanistan and Iraq, say, 200,000 there. Then move the majority of combat forces say 500,000 to N. Korea.
And what would be so bad about the draft? Personally, I think every able bodied male at the completion of high school should have to go through basic training.
Yeah but anytime you have a draft, you have people with connections not serving the way the rest of the lowly citizens would. At least exemptions couldn't be bought like they were in the civil war. If we have a draft everyone goes, no matter how powerful your mom or dad is. Thats the only way its fair.
Oh, I agree. The only way someone would not be drafted is if they are a last surviving son. Otherwise, suit up.
Can you imagine how much better this country would be if every male had to go through basic.
Just when I think things could not possibly get worse, somebody suggests a draft and World War III.
are you genuinely advocating a nuclear first strike?
IMO, war in N.Korea isn't the way to go
The thing about drafts are that most people don't like being forced to do things, especially risk their lives in the military. If they wanted to be in service, I'm sure they already would be.
Personally, I wouldn't mind having a year or two of compulsary military service right after high school, as long as there isn't a war going on
At this point in time, I think it would be a big mistake for the US to start any more wars, especially with N.Korea. With their nuclear capabilities, they pose a much bigger threat (in war) than Iraq and Afghanistan. Also, don't they have a million men in their army or something?
I think diplomacy is absolutely the way to go with N.Korea. More war is just going to make things much worse for the US than it already is.
one of my friends is from south korea, and tells me that a lot of the rhetoric coming out of the north is just bluster, and they don't even really pay it much mind in the south. i think now that talks are finally going to begin (and not one on one as the north wanted), it's absurd to advocate a first strike. i hope the bush team knows that if they can resolve this diplomatically, it will be a huge boost to their credibility, with voters here and with world leaders.
Sorry, B2TM, my teenage kids will not be used as cannon fodder for neoconservative ambition! Service in a military for national defense is one thing - this idea of starting a war in Korea is nothing short of insanity!
Hey, we could do our "surgical strike" and irradiate the North for thousands of years - that would be liberation wouldn't it? How about restarting the whole Korean conflict with maybe millions of casualties as the result - that would show 'em! Why, because of some macho conservative rhetoric about how we don't negotiate with regimes like this? This policy is insane!
mactastic, after 50 years of our sitting by and watching the abuse of its citizenry by the regime in North Korea, why go in now? Sure, it's sarcasm. However, I've rarely been able to stop fools from doing the obviously stupid, most notably politicians.
Ambrose, your comment reminds me of what some Costa Ricans were saying in 1985 about Nicaragua's Sandanistas "exporting revolution" via invasions in Central America. "They might invade us, but we'll swap them civilian clothes for their uniforms and guns; after a few good meals, they'll settle down. Wish we had Mickey Mouse watches, like the GIs traded the Russians in 1945."
South Korea's best defense against an invasion from the North would be a good Meals on Wheels program...
Re the draft: I got my greetings from Ike 11/'53. Now, this was after the shooting stopped in Korea. I've thought about this issue a lot since those days, and there is indeed one benefit to a military which has draftees in it: It is a citizen army, and the politicians would have to be a lot more careful before using force in foreign lands. (At least I think they would.) A politician's first perceived duty is to himself, to get re-elected, and only a war with a broadspread public support would allow re-election. I have the opinion without proof that our foreign policies might be different, if TPTB knew that military force was less readily available. (Well, this is about the only major rationale I could offer.)
OTOH, the idea of a professional, all-voluteer military makes me a bit nervous, for whatever potential exists that the loyalty would be to the military and not the society itself. I'm not saying I believe that would happen here, but it has happened elsewhere.
If we go to war with North Korea, Tokyo is gone. Seoul too.
Well, let me say this. My policy would be to basically tell the north that the nuke program had to go in exchange for humanitarian aid. If they refuse that, then war is inevitable eventually. N. Korea is falling apart from the inside. So either they will attack the South, or there will be a civil war in the North.
As for the best that could happen. Civil war obviously would be better for our national interests, and actually I hope it happens. Those people are suffering over there so badly that something is going to reach a breatking point.
As for a draft, I did not say into service, just through basic. It would teach the younger generation a lot about what it means to be a man.
As for tactical strike. If the North were to invade the south,,,,,,, Hell yea use em. All we would need is one Ohio class sub sitting off the cost with a few tomahawks ready to go. Or, let 40,000 Americans be slaughtered at the hands of the north, and probably a million South Koreans.
The north had 20 times the tanks we have over there, 10 times the aircraft, countless more artillary positions, and a hell of a lot more people that will come running at the border.
So, if they invaded. Yes, use tactical nukes to stop the invation, and precision strikes to take out all of their nuclear plants, and sites of weapons.
Off and on, I've wondered if our troops aren't in South Korea to keep the ROK Army from heading north. Sort of a "Let's have done with this nonsense!" after some PRK kill-squad infiltrates south into the ROK.
The best way to get rid of the "grand and glorious" Kim Jong il is to normalize the relations between the North and South to the degree that the economy of the South overwhelms the North. The reduction of troops and normalization of relations with the US would go a long way to help this process. If we have to do business with Kim to walk away from the brink of war then that sounds fine to me. Ideological blinders that ramp up tensions are just foolishness that plays into the paranoia that keeps Kim in power. It may also lead to a conflagration that would mean thousands, if not millions, of deaths. I've no interest in following Bush or Pat Robertson down that road.
Being a man means training to kill your fellow man?
I think the world, especially our nation, could do without such mandatory militarisation.
What percentage of the US military is female and, are they interested in learning what it means to be a "man"?
You don't think it would be...
a bad thing
if Tokyo was nuked?
Don't you think
one might slip through?
Are you willing to take that chance for them?
Don't you think
the Japanese have had us initiate
enough nuclear holocausts
in their nation?
Don't you think China, with nukes that can reach the West Coast, might have something to say about us dropping thermonuclear warheads in their backyard?
Sayhey, I think the Chinese give lip-service to "doing business" with the PRK, but I don't think they really do much in the classic sense of business. The political support is pretty much window dressing, used as a ploy to keep the US off balance. Were it not for this political convenience of the status quo, I imagine they'd be as happy as anyone to see the ROK gain ascendancy.
The South Koreans have been trying for decades to achieve some sort of normality.
Regardless of basic US distaste for any Communist regime, and particularly one as murderous as the PRK, any real evidence of a desire for "normalization" on the part of Kim would be welcomed.
OMG, What I was saying is that IF the NORTH invaded the south, then yes use tactical nukes to stop them. They would launch on Japan at the same time they invaded the south. bank on it. And sorry, but China doesn't possess any ICBM's.
Have you ever served? Basic is a lot more than learning how to kill someone. In fact in Navy basic, there is no hand to hand combat training, or weapons training. Basic teaches disipline, and how to rely on people and be part of team.
I would say probably 20% or so, but I don't think it is right to mandate that women be drafted. In fact, they can not be, that is why I did not include them.
I'll one up you then. I don't believe it's right to mandate anyone to be drafted.