AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-07-06, 13:28   Link #3241
Thingle
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Imperial Manila, Philippines
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zero Shinohara View Post
I'll agree with that. And I won't be as naive as to say there weren't second motives in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. There were. But how about North Korea? Don't you think we have a lot to gain from having one more ally in the region? If Iraq is our current base of operations in the middle east, wouldn't having a nice little piece of land in East Asia benefit us as well? We have allies in the region, but wouldn't we benefit a bit more from "occupying" a country there?
Yep. This is excactly what I meant. You guys portray yourselves as leaders of the free world and you get the pressure to do something about hellholes like NK. That's stupid, isn't it? Sweden or Switzerland don't feel the same pressure, yet they're free as well. Why so? I think you know why.

Why can these 2 countries act like NK (or any random hell hole) is nobody's business and get away with it, while the USA cannot? It's like you guys always feel the need to uphold these "values" anyplace, anytime.
Thingle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-06, 15:20   Link #3242
Saleh
Inactive
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Sooner or later that day will also come. Whether that will be a good thing or a bad one is still undecided.

President Obama and President Dmitri A. Medvedev Announce Nuclear Deal

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYTimes
MOSCOW — The United States and Russia, seeking to move forward on one of the most significant arms control treaties since the end of the cold war, announced Monday that they had reached a preliminary agreement on cutting each country’s stockpiles of strategic nuclear weapons by as much as one-third.

The so-called framework agreement, which is intended to replace the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or Start, was put together by negotiators as President Obama arrived here for his first Russian-American summit meeting. It was approved by Mr. Obama and Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev.

Since taking office in January, Mr. Obama has vowed to improve relations with Russia, which had steadily worsened in the final years of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Less than a year ago, Russia’s war with Georgia had caused the deepest strains between Moscow and the West since the fall of the Soviet Union.

At a new conference on Monday, Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev hailed the arms control framework and a range of other agreements on issues like Afghanistan, Iran and other matters. Both men spoke warmly of their negotiations, indicating that they hoped their meeting was an important step in renewed cooperation.

Mr. Medvedev appeared to indicate more willingness to lend Russia’s help to the United States in trying to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran and North Korea, a priority of the Obama administration.

“It’s our common, joint responsibility, and we should do our utmost to prevent any negative trends there, and we are ready to do that,” Mr. Medvedev said. “Our negotiations with President Obama have demonstrated that we share the same attitude towards this problem.

Mr. Obama declared that the United States and Russia had to set an example by reducing their own arsenals.

“This is an urgent issue, and one in which the United States and Russia have to take leadership,” Mr. Obama said. “It is very difficult for us to exert that leadership unless we are showing ourselves willing to deal with our own nuclear stockpiles in a more rational way.”

...
Saleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-06, 16:08   Link #3243
Shadow Kira01
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
North Korea's Missile Threat

The problem with the US on the issue of North Korea is that the United States cannot give up their image in the world as a justice freak but unfortunately, most nations in the world do not acknowledge the US as a justice freak but rather that of something negative.. On the contrary, a justice freak is just as negative as the latter.

Whenever the US launches a military operation, they would call it something like "to defend justice" or "for freedom and democracy" but of course, every time they actually launch a military offensive is when there is an actual economic advantage to it. Otherwise, the US will take the image "we cannot interfere with other nations' internal affairs" or "it is best for the US to stay uninvolved as that it will prevent the escalation of the conflict" or "peaceful diplomatic channels is the best solution" but in the end, those are all merely just excuses of some sort.

Even so, I don't think the US can do anything about North Korea as of now taking into consideration of the situation. In fact, most nations, if not all cannot come up with a feasible solution to the matter as that obstacles do exist. First of all, North Korea is backed by China and Russia who do not support them provoking a war as that it will no doubt damage their economy as that it is not part of their plans. However, chances are that North Korea will go ahead and launch a military offensive without the agreement of their backers leaving them no choice but to follow suit as that it is only beneficial to do so than otherwise.

Based on North Korea's recent provocative actions, it is only reasonable to assume that their intentions to launch a military offensive on Japan is not a bluff. Their missile technology has improved thanks to the cooperation between Japanese businessmen and Chinese companies. However, I doubt North Korea has the capability to attack the American mainland but Hawaii may be at risk. I have my doubts as to whether North Korea would foolishly launch missiles on South Korea as that damaging their infrastructure and economy would do serious harm to their motives of absorbing the South's flourishing economy. For that matter, the nation at the greatest risk would be no other than Japan and the fact that North Korea has succeeded in nuclear capability just means double trouble. Nonetheless, nothing can be done as of now...

Judging from North Korea's strategic moves, I believe there will be quite a few more missile launches before the US-led alliance will come up with a first step to some unknown feasible solution in the upcoming several months.
__________________
Shadow Kira01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-06, 22:46   Link #3244
iLney
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
but.... why would NK would want to invade Japan? What would it get from it?
iLney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 04:32   Link #3245
428
封鎖された渋谷で
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLney View Post
but.... why would NK would want to invade Japan? What would it get from it?
As a Japanese, I assure you, a hell lot. Remember we still host US forces on our territory. And on Ioto (formerly Iwojima), US forces seem to be hiding high-class nukes that I'm sure DPRK woukd love to have. That, and the fact that Japan is 2nd largest contributer to UN and UNSC makes us a convinent target especiall since we can't wage war.
428 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 04:51   Link #3246
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Japan can't wage war, but the SDF WILL give NK one hell of a fight if the NK Red Guards land on any part of the country.
__________________
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 05:57   Link #3247
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
Japan can't wage war, but the SDF WILL give NK one hell of a fight if the NK Red Guards land on any part of the country.
Not in a war of attrition. Fighting a force larger than yours, even in an exercise, can make people go nuts. Besides, Japan is made up of a series of small islands, mobilising troops could be difficult to bluntly repel a large force. We can only hope that China moves his hands rather than his mouth in such an incursion, or that Taiwan is able to help by flanking an invaded SK from the bottom of their map. Philipphines might be a great ally, but its fighting force is not up to standard to even take a bit of NK on.

Also, NK can use Japan as a base to island hop to SEA, or build a silo to hit US mainland with greater ease. It could also re-ignite Vietnam as anti-US.

But one thing about NK is that if it starts a war, it will not last more than 5 years without Chinese support. Never underestimate the power of the otaku.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.
SaintessHeart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 06:53   Link #3248
428
封鎖された渋谷で
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Not in a war of attrition. Fighting a force larger than yours, even in an exercise, can make people go nuts. Besides, Japan is made up of a series of small islands, mobilising troops could be difficult to bluntly repel a large force. We can only hope that China moves his hands rather than his mouth in such an incursion,
You think so? The Red buddies? No I don't. Only the アメリカージン can save us now.

Quote:
or that Taiwan is able to help by flanking an invaded SK from the bottom of their map.
More plausible. Will end in the west openly recgonising ROC, esp. in th eface of a inert China.

Quote:
Philipphines might be a great ally, but its fighting force is not up to standard to even take a bit of NK on.

Also, NK can use Japan as a base to island hop to SEA, or build a silo to hit US mainland with greater ease. It could also re-ignite Vietnam as anti-US.

But one thing about NK is that if it starts a war, it will not last more than 5 years without Chinese support. Never underestimate the power of the otaku.
5 years indeed. I say, maybe 5 decades. Because DPRK already has been (technically) at war with ROK for 50 years. So? And besides, I think the otaku is the most worrying thing in true fact. Because, they will somehow cause an impediment to the war efforts, I can forsee.
428 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 08:55   Link #3249
iLney
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by 428 View Post
As a Japanese, I assure you, a hell lot. Remember we still host US forces on our territory. And on Ioto (formerly Iwojima), US forces seem to be hiding high-class nukes that I'm sure DPRK woukd love to have. That, and the fact that Japan is 2nd largest contributer to UN and UNSC makes us a convinent target especiall since we can't wage war.
But... that means a sure defeat. Even those NK's d---heads in NK's HQ should know that. They will be fighting the US, not Japan. Plus, to invade Japan on large scale, it needs a strong navy, which is almost non-existent in NK. Chinese Navy is a joke comparing to any powerhouse in NATO, let alone the US. Even Japanese force in WWII could squash NK now like a bug using navy alone.

Actually, why don't Japan just build a kick-ass navy? Sure navy is the ONE tool that needed for an empire but it must go hand-in-hand with a decent ground force, which Japan is not compelled to build up. That would go well with the spirit of Japan's constitution. And I personally think the Chinese wants to avoid the most. They can't compete with anyone on the high sea, really.
iLney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 09:18   Link #3250
428
封鎖された渋谷で
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLney View Post
But... that means a sure defeat. Even those NK's d---heads in NK's HQ should know that. They will be fighting the US, not Japan. Plus, to invade Japan on large scale, it needs a strong navy, which is almost non-existent in NK. Chinese Navy is a joke comparing to any powerhouse in NATO, let alone the US. Even Japanese force in WWII could squash NK now like a bug using navy alone.
Our navy has been pared down.

Quote:
Actually, why don't Japan just build a kick-ass navy? Sure navy is the ONE tool that needed for an empire but it must go hand-in-hand with a decent ground force, which Japan is not compelled to build up. That would go well with the spirit of Japan's constitution. And I personally think the Chinese wants to avoid the most. They can't compete with anyone on the high sea, really.
Our budget lacks MONEY MONEY MONEY. (For defence at least, the consitution has limits on defence spending - leading to our deficits in the UN peacekeeping contributions)
428 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 09:38   Link #3251
Thingle
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Imperial Manila, Philippines
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Also, NK can use Japan as a base to island hop to SEA, or build a silo to hit US mainland with greater ease. It could also re-ignite Vietnam as anti-US.
LOL. Island hopping on an empty stomach? Blasphemy.

NK troops would drop dead due to starvation within 50km of anything.
Thingle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 09:56   Link #3252
428
封鎖された渋谷で
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thingle View Post
LOL. Island hopping on an empty stomach? Blasphemy.

NK troops would drop dead due to starvation within 50km of anything.
You never know. The army is well fed by the even-more well fed government at the expense of the people.
428 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 10:31   Link #3253
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Not in a war of attrition. Fighting a force larger than yours, even in an exercise, can make people go nuts. Besides, Japan is made up of a series of small islands, mobilising troops could be difficult to bluntly repel a large force. We can only hope that China moves his hands rather than his mouth in such an incursion, or that Taiwan is able to help by flanking an invaded SK from the bottom of their map. Philipphines might be a great ally, but its fighting force is not up to standard to even take a bit of NK on.

Also, NK can use Japan as a base to island hop to SEA, or build a silo to hit US mainland with greater ease. It could also re-ignite Vietnam as anti-US.

But one thing about NK is that if it starts a war, it will not last more than 5 years without Chinese support. Never underestimate the power of the otaku.
I was playing World In Conflict, and I thought to myself that it would make a whole lot more sense for the Soviet Union to invade Japan rather than land troops in Seattle (which they did successfully in the game).

But, any land battle to conquer Japan would have to be fought out in the megalopolises. That's where the main stuff are.
__________________
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 13:02   Link #3254
SaintessHeart
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thingle View Post
LOL. Island hopping on an empty stomach? Blasphemy.

NK troops would drop dead due to starvation within 50km of anything.
Scavenging, plundering and raiding to sustain their supplies.....why not?

Besides, 428 is right. Their army is better fed than the civilians and are pretty self-sustainable in the long run. But pull their supply lines thin and we see a large loophole in their invasion force.

Although irrelevant at times in the face of modern technology, fighting spirit can be a factor to deciding victory or defeat in a battle. US lost 50,000 troops to that factor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
I was playing World In Conflict, and I thought to myself that it would make a whole lot more sense for the Soviet Union to invade Japan rather than land troops in Seattle (which they did successfully in the game).

But, any land battle to conquer Japan would have to be fought out in the megalopolises. That's where the main stuff are.
If urban warfare is that easy. You've seen the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, even their SOF suffer serious casualties and asset damages despite being superior in equipment, tactics and training.

Japan is a pretty good place to attack for NK anyway. It is technologically advanced, an important sea route, close to US and has a vibrant industry. It is a good technological and industrial asset to have.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 428 View Post
Our navy has been pared down.
But still slightly superior to NK's Navy. They don't have any good ships other than torpedo boats, FC/PVs (Fast Craft / Patrol Vessels), frigates and a large number of outdated subs. Their frigates are most likely used as flagships in times of war, so beat them out and everything should be much easier.

The real problems are their submarines though. They can insert SOF troops onto islands and cause alot of damage, much like how the Makin Island raid is conducted back in WWII.

The real problem lies with NK's missiles. We could say that any fleet placed in close proximity could be easily clusterf***ed, while spreading them apart makes them vulnerable to the NK's submarines.
__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Last edited by SaintessHeart; 2009-07-07 at 13:18.
SaintessHeart is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 13:21   Link #3255
Terrestrial Dream
勇者
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLney View Post
But... that means a sure defeat. Even those NK's d---heads in NK's HQ should know that. They will be fighting the US, not Japan. Plus, to invade Japan on large scale, it needs a strong navy, which is almost non-existent in NK. Chinese Navy is a joke comparing to any powerhouse in NATO, let alone the US. Even Japanese force in WWII could squash NK now like a bug using navy alone.

Actually, why don't Japan just build a kick-ass navy? Sure navy is the ONE tool that needed for an empire but it must go hand-in-hand with a decent ground force, which Japan is not compelled to build up. That would go well with the spirit of Japan's constitution. And I personally think the Chinese wants to avoid the most. They can't compete with anyone on the high sea, really.
I would prefer Japan not having any strong navy. And I don't really see NK prioritizing Japan over SK ad unification.
__________________
Terrestrial Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 14:06   Link #3256
Kamui4356
Aria Company
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by 428 View Post
As a Japanese, I assure you, a hell lot. Remember we still host US forces on our territory. And on Ioto (formerly Iwojima), US forces seem to be hiding high-class nukes that I'm sure DPRK woukd love to have. That, and the fact that Japan is 2nd largest contributer to UN and UNSC makes us a convinent target especiall since we can't wage war.
That's not gaining North Korea anything, except for becoming the world's #1 "involuntary importer" of US made bombs overnight. Also Japan can fight if they're attacked. It's called the self defense force for a reason.

Also, while the US did store nukes in Okinawa, in violation of treaties, during the cold war, they have since been removed. Even if they were still there, North Korea has absolutely no way of getting troops there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iLney View Post
Actually, why don't Japan just build a kick-ass navy?
Because they already have a kick-ass navy that's the most powerful in the region. The JMSDF can, on paper at least, slaughter the Chinese PLN, let alone whatever North Korea considers a navy. They may lack heavy units, but the US Navy is there backing them up with a carrier battle group too. Also, if Japan buys the stol version of the F-35, a quick refit to add a ski jump and Japan's new Hyuga class "helicoptor destroyers" become Japan's new Hyuga class aircraft carriers. (Because of their size they need the ski-jump to operate fixed wing aircraft.)

Not that North Korea has any chance in hell of mounting a large scale amphibious operation even if they didn't have the JMSDF and US navy to deal with first. after all, an invasion like that requires a logistical base North Korea doesn't have, can't develop on their own, and can't buy from China, because China doesn't really have it either, not yet at least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintessHeart View Post
Scavenging, plundering and raiding to sustain their supplies.....why not?
Because you can't supply a modern army that way. Even if you take care of food, they'll quickly run out of bullets, shells, and everything else without a supply line.

Quote:
Besides, 428 is right. Their army is better fed than the civilians and are pretty self-sustainable in the long run. But pull their supply lines thin and we see a large loophole in their invasion force.
And what exactly with North Korea land those troops with? And how will they keep them supplied? The North Korean Navy can't even sail around the Korean Penninsula to reinforce the other coast let alone cross the sea of Japan.

Quote:
Although irrelevant at times in the face of modern technology, fighting spirit can be a factor to deciding victory or defeat in a battle. US lost 50,000 troops to that factor.
Except that "fighting spirit" doesn't last long when you're starving, out of ammo, and being bombed without any way of fighting back.



Quote:
Japan is a pretty good place to attack for NK anyway. It is technologically advanced, an important sea route, close to US and has a vibrant industry. It is a good technological and industrial asset to have.
Now see, those are all reasons why a North Korean invasion of Japan would fail miserable, not reasons for North Korea to invade.



Quote:
But still slightly superior to NK's Navy. They don't have any good ships other than torpedo boats, FC/PVs (Fast Craft / Patrol Vessels), frigates and a large number of outdated subs. Their frigates are most likely used as flagships in times of war, so beat them out and everything should be much easier.



The real problems are their submarines though. They can insert SOF troops onto islands and cause alot of damage, much like how the Makin Island raid is conducted back in WWII.
Slightly? That's like saying a lion is slightly stronger than a house cat. Also, North Korea's subs are late 40s, early 50s era designs. They're not going to be all that tough to find.

Quote:
The real problem lies with NK's missiles. We could say that any fleet placed in close proximity could be easily clusterf***ed, while spreading them apart makes them vulnerable to the NK's submarines.
Except their anti-ship missiles are also 50s designs and they need to know where the targets are to use them at all. Even if they did, they'd need to launch enough to overwhelm a modern ship's defense. With SM-2s and 3s for long range defense, ESSMs for mid range, and Phalenx for close in defense, a modern warship isn't just a floating target.
__________________

Last edited by Kamui4356; 2009-07-07 at 14:38.
Kamui4356 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 15:05   Link #3257
LeoXiao
提倡自我工業化
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vereinigte Staaten
Age: 22
150+ dead in Massacre in Xinjiang area of China

Wow. This is some pretty nasty stuff going on. The protest was only a couple thousands but already so many people were killed.
LeoXiao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 16:08   Link #3258
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeoXiao View Post
150+ dead in Massacre in Xinjiang area of China

Wow. This is some pretty nasty stuff going on. The protest was only a couple thousands but already so many people were killed.

Unfortunately in the US and the west there's no outrage. We're saturated with michael jackson news and the future of his assets and 3 children.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 16:19   Link #3259
Dilla
'Sup Ballers
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: North Carolina, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by mg1942 View Post
Unfortunately in the US and the west there's no outrage. We're saturated with michael jackson news and the future of his assets and 3 children.
To be honest, I don't think there would be much outrage in the West regardless, at least with the average Westerner.
Dilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-07-07, 16:25   Link #3260
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
With all this M.J. and Palin stuff, I must have missed the news that California has started to issue IOUs, and that some banks will not accept them as of Friday.

http://247wallst.com/2009/06/30/cali...-other-states/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124692354575702881.html
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,3106808.story

Is this news only limited to Californians? I had to dig pretty deep to run across it. Is this a big deal over there? I would be pretty pissed if I received an IOU for something....I'm surprised there isn't a shitload of recalls going on over there, or are people just taking it up the ass and say 'thank you'?
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

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 -5. The time now is 15:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.