More Korean War Games

That isn't the way that former US national intelligence director Dennis Blair looks at it.

Quote:

Blair, who just returned from the Korean peninsula, said he doesn't see a major war starting, but he believes recent aggression by the North will press South Korea into some lower level military confrontations.

He said there's support among South Koreans for their military to take a stronger stance, adding that "a South Korean government who does not react would not be able to survive there."

Apparently, the South Koreans can come up with any story at all, and the western press will swallow it whole hog, so they can more or less start any confrontation they choose, and you, among others, will not question it. But that is what being a "free thinker" is all about: taking coffee and learning daily talking points from the Toronto Sun and memorizing them so they can be regurgitated them on the internet during mental health minutes.

"I know I am free, I read it in the paper!"

Cueball wrote:

  and you, among others, will not question it. But that is what being a "free thinker" is all about: taking coffee and learning daily talking points from the Toronto Sun and memorizing them so they can be regurgitated them on the internet during mental health minutes.

Cueball, this is a personal attack. Cut it out, now.

US Builds Military Alliance With Japan, South Korea for War in the East

http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/12/14/u-s-builds-military-alliance-...

"The Washington-Tokyo-Seoul military axis is preparing for war. And not only on the Korean Peninsula..

Then if North Korea really wants to jam their tarts, they should just ignore this, yes?  No war, no profits, no smiles on the faces of those warfiteers!  How often is a plan that simple, yet that foolproof?

Snert wrote:

Then if North Korea really wants to jam their tarts, they should just ignore this, yes?  No war, no profits, no smiles on the faces of those warfiteers!  How often is a plan that simple, yet that foolproof?

They must be following Snert's excellent advice.

[url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/20/3097983.htm?section=justin... Koreans say they won't retaliate against US-backed terrorism[/url] No more Tonkin style false flags! US Military out now!

So what now for the country whose economy is based largely on war? Will they up the ante through South Korean maneuvering? Will South Koreans resent their stooges being manipulated by Warshington? Strategy of tension backfires on warmongers.

I still have this sneaking suspicion that a certain country whose economy is largely based on war is begging for a conflagration of war. And due to the most recent crisis of neoliberal voodoo, WW III just might fix the hopelessly bankrupt capitalist system. And keep in mind that psychotics in the RAND Corporation once advised the US Gov and Military that if only 10 or 20 million Americans survived a nuclear exchange with millions of people in Asia squatting on corporate America's private property, it would be a win-win situation. I really have to laugh my head off at the propaganda that says North Korean leaders are the biggest threat to peace in that region of the world. What a sad and yet hilarious joke that point of view is. God help us.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

 

Fidel all South Korea has to do is out last North Korea. Sooner or later NK is going to fail. How ugly that failure is will be is up to the NK leadership and China.

You mean like the US economy is failing? There are currently more than twice as many Americans in dire economic straights than North Korea has people. [url=http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2010/12/21/hungry-at-the-holidays/]44 million Americans are food insecure[/url] and 1 in 7 living on food stamps. It's astounding in a nation with unparalleled in the world amounts of arable farmland and with citrus and fruit imports subsidized by what amounts to slave labour in Latin America for the last 100 years in a row.

If North Korea, a country the size of the state of Mississippi and mainly mountainous does fail, it will be due to what George dubya says about it, that North Korea is the most sanctioned, most laid siege-to country by a vicious empire in modern history. But it won't be due to failed communist ideology. The capitalist system is failing for the umpteenth time since 14th century Italy. Economic failure is what capitalists know how to achieve under the most ideal peace time conditions and without anyone demonstrating it for them.

Let me worry about the USA economy, I live here.

North Korea will fail because it's still fighting a slow burn (civil) war with the South... you seem to think there's peace, there isn't, there's only a cease fire agreement between the two belligerents. The Korean people for the most part are one people divided into two nations; there will be no peace until there is only one nation.  

The South is going to outlast the North. That is their strategy and if it involves siege warfare if sorts so be it.

If you know any Koreans ask them... don't just run to the college students, ask some of the older Koreans if you can find them. As you know I live with one so I already know the answer. They don't want war but they also don't want North Korea to last "forever".

.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Let me worry about the USA economy, I live here.

Don't worry, BDC, we are promoting open borders, and a priority lane for babblers, for when Washington, D.C. goes the way of ancient Rome. You'll be welcome here!

The Yanks are afraid that the Koreas will unite and become an economic powerhouse that will add to the Asian colossus now out- competing the US economy. The Germanys united. It's time the US Military got the hell off the Korean peninsula and stopped threatening the North with nuclear annihilation. The US and Japan and S. Korea would hammer the snot out of North Korea if it came down to a war of nukes. But then again, there is China. And then there is Russia with nukes as well. The world doesn't need this shit. The world has been sold a pack of lies for the last 60 years about a system that is unsustainable over the long run. It's time for the 95% of people on this earth to realize they far outnumber the ones screwing things up as badly as they have.

We all wish that elections could be the answer, but they are not. I'm afraid that the world will have to be brought to stand before the edge and forced to stare solemnly into the abyss before Mr Obama's change can be realized.  At the precipice we will all decide whether change is worth fighting for or not.

Actually what's on the Korean talk shows is re-unification would take a whole generation at the very least, probably longer and if theses a war that proceeded re-unification who knows how long or how much economic drain would be required. They did study the German re-unification to get an idea as to what to do and not do.

Most Koreans don't see that happening anytime soon. My wife thinks we'll be very old or dead gone before it happens.

A little real time update for you all: On the Korean news today they showed the North Korean news announcer, the women this time, warn South Korea, that they will burn them with sacred nuclear fire if they are attacked. My wife told her to shut up... she didn't listen...

Should it happen, it would be very low level radiation or "dirty" bombs, most likely delivered by artillery.

I don't think it will happen. There is too great a risk of North as well as South Korean people becoming casualties that must be taken into consideration.

I think it's a case of brinksmanship and escalation.

The only trouble with this very dangerous bullying is that it runs the risk of dragging the nuclear powers - the U.S.A., China and possibly Russia into it.

Much as the system of alliances dragged the European empires and powerful countries (and eventually the U.S.A.) into WW1.

Deja Vu 1950 in 2010: Winds of War in Korea?  -  by JA Gutiarrez D

http://www.ainfos.ca/en/ainfos24680.html

"It seems, then, that some hawks in Washington also consider that it is now or never. Before the DPRK becomes a nuclear power, we must unleash a limited war, which could become total war. So the provocations and the closure of the road to dialogue.."

ROK President Lee Heats Up Cold War (and vid)

http://www.voltairenet.org/article167861.html

"There are three key facts that place the brinksmanship being played out on the Korean peninsula into perspective. With these acts providing the context, the recent behaviour of South Korea is revealed to be that of a local bully acting on behalf of a uch larger global one. Canadian journalist Stephen Gowans dissects the fast unravelling crisis between the 2 Koreas.."

South Korea Shot Over 3,600 Shells

http://www.opednews.com/articles/South-Korea-Shot-Over-3-60-by-Stanley-H...

"Hours before North Korea started its shelling, South Korean artillery units located in the West Sea Islands, just 7 miles from the North Korean coast, engaged in firing exercises for 4 hours - firing over 900 shells per hour into contested waters.."

Cueball wrote:

A good dose of brinksmanship might just head of the disaster of reconcilliation.

Where the "brinksmanship" is coming from is North Korea caused by turmoil from a transition in leadership and a need for food and other staple imports from the U.S.A, the Western Hemisphere and Europe.

South Korea is also definitely rattling the saber, egged on by the U.S.A. The U.S.A. is hesitant over the prospect of a unified Korea that will be a rising economic power, likely to surpass Japan and be second only to China.

China for its part, is not egging on North Korea. China is doing very well economically. Chaos and conflict cause uncertainty in the financial market which in turn harms economies and makes foreign resource supplies insecure. China does not want chaos and conflict in the region. North Korea appears to be a difficult to control maverick.

Brinksmanship is a dangerous game that sometimes takes a life of its own when countries cross diplomatic lines where they can't back down and where their hands are forced to commit the act(s) because the countries dare not lose face.

This could happen with North and South Korea and China and the U.S.A. If the conflict in the region becomes serious enough, not only do we have the nuclear powers of China and the U.S.A. but Russia and who knows, India and Pakistan could be dragged in this time as well.

Cueball wrote:

Frmrsldr wrote:

Cueball wrote:

A good dose of brinksmanship might just head of the disaster of reconcilliation.

Where the "brinksmanship" is coming from is North Korea caused by turmoil from a transition in leadership and a need for food and other staple imports from the U.S.A, the Western Hemisphere and Europe.

That is the kind of pseudo-analysis that becomes popular in the press because it is too clever by half.

Don't forget, I'm not blaming North Korea solely. It was the U.S.A. that oddly included North Korea in the "Axis of Evil" and both the Bush and Obama administrations have an embargo that they encourage others to join against North Korea. One has to ask if thinly veiled metaphorical references to nuclear war by North Korea are also necessary. South Korea is also guilty (described as "saber rattling") with its intentionally provocative live fire military exersizes which are supported and encouraged (described as "egged on") by the U.S.A. - much like Germany's support of Austria Hungary after the assassination of heir apparent Archduke Francis Ferdinand in 1914.

My last post was a warning of the dangers of brinksmanship in general.

There are many far better ways to conduct foreign policy and relations.

Cueball wrote:

The only possible purpose of having bases on these islands is to be a launching point for invasions of the North Korean coast, and that is about it.

Definitely.

Or if not, then at least a 'thorn in the side' constant (and unnecessary) irritant.

I never said that a unified Korea would be a Chinese vassal.

I pointed out (that over the last ~5 years) North Korea has been acting as a maverick, China having little control over it.

I also pointed out that the U.S.A. views with hesitation a unified Korea as it poses an economic threat (to the U.S.A.) being second only to China in the region.

The debate of who (is) initiated/initiating the saber rattling against whom is a "which came first, chicken or the egg?" type argument.

I will venture to say that it doesn't make much sense for North Korea to initiate such unprovoked and suicidal violent words, gestures and acts.

As I said earlier, North Korea is not egged on by China in this.

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has not abandoned the policy to unify the two Koreas. His approach however, is different. He has rejected the "Sunshine Policy." His policy is the opposite: to be antagonistic and confrontational toward North Korea with the idea that this will hasten the downfall of the North Korean regime and thus accomplish reunification faster than the "Sunshine Policy." Since the (second) Bush administration, this has also been the U.S.A.'s approach to North Korea. The U.S.A. is currently egging South Korea on in this regard.

Lee Myung-bak doesn't seem to have rejected the possibility of war in this scenario either: Provoking North Korea into a war with joint U.S. - South Korean live fire military exercizes.

China ceded Korea to Japan as a 'sphere of influence' after the 1894-5 First Sino-Japanese War.

I post the following brief history of Japanese colonial occupation of Korea during World War II (WW2 in Asia lasted 15 years, beginning ~1930) as although some are aware of this history, others may not and might find it interesting:

Wikipedia wrote:

Continued anti-Japanese uprisings, such as the nationwide uprising of students in November 1929, led to the strengthening of military rule in 1931. After the outbreaks of the Sino-Japanese War in 1937 and World War II Japan attempted to exterminate Korea as a nation. The continuance of Korean culture itself began to be illegal. Worship at Japanese Shinto shrines was made compulsory. The school curriculum was radically modified to eliminate teaching in the Korean language and history within Korea. The Korean language was banned and Koreans were forced to adopt Japanese names, and newspapers were prohibited from publishing in Korean. Numerous Korean cultural artifacts were destroyed or taken to Japan. According to an investigation by the South Korean government, 75,311 cultural assests were taken from Korea.

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

Clearly when N. Korean media calls for a nuclear strike on South Korea it is unconscionable.  On the other hand Fox and other US media calling for nuclear strikes on Iran and North Korea and invasion of numerous other sovereign states is merely defending democracy and a little saber rattling not true brinksmanship.  There have been war hawks in washington for over two centuries and that is just what their friendly press called them not their enemies.

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Cueball wrote:

The obvious solution is simply to hand the Islands over to the UN and make them part of the Demilitarized Zone. The only possible purpose of having bases on these islands is to be a launching point for invasions of the North Korean coast, and that is about it.

 

I looked at that city on that island on Google, and my estimation is that there is no way that that little Island can support a town that side through agrigculture and fishing. In other words that Island is a military base, formest, before anything else. As for the people who actually live off of the Island, I am sure they would be happy to live their without the thread of being on the front line of a continuation of the civil war.

Of course we should honour the 516 Canadains that made the ultimate sacrafice during the Korean Conflict for such a noble cause. Half of Korea today lives in freedom do imn part of their effort. It is a shame that the North still lives under the world's most oppressive regime created by the Soviets.

klarence is a troll and he's gone.

wdsaddasd wrote:

Your estimation is wrong. South Korea is full of very small islands containing fishing villages. The towns on these islands number a few hundred with small fishing boats tied up at the shoreline. The people have lived in this manner for hundreds of years. There is no reason why they should move from land occupied by their ancestors for generations

 

Nope. I googled this island that was shelled and the town there is not a tiny little fishing village. In fact, the official population of the island is 1300 people. Obviously I can find no official estimate of the number ofmilitary personnel on this Island.

For comparison, I have found a similarly sized Island just off the coast of China, which is has the proverbial fishing villages you are speaking about. That is the first image missing from it but present in the second image of Yeongpeong Island is the large built up area, which by way of comparison is similar to the dimensions of the an aread in Toronto from Dupont south to Bloor and bordered by Bathurst and Ossington.

That is a very big built up area for an Island with a total area of 7 miles.

In the first case, we can see all the little hamlets and huts used by the fishermen and farmers, and these are disbursed all over the Island. The second has a concentrated built up area of the kind comensurate with signficant centralized activity, such as a military base. I can't think of any other purpose for it.

It matters because these particular islands are well withing the 12 NMI territorial waters limit that is generally accepted world wide. Most islands within this limit are considered the national territory of the country that possessess the mainland in that area. This is one issue. An issue of soveriegnty.

It is quite another matter turning islands such as these into military bases, as the South Koreans have done.

WilderMore wrote:

I'm not sure if Maysie has spent time in South Korea as I have, but they truly do appreciate the sacrifices made by Canadian soldiers (and all the other nations' of course) in defence of their freedom. The people of the South know what life would be like under the rule of the North, and they don't like it.

The current South Korean government in its desire to stay on good terms with the U.S. has suppressed evidence of torture and abuse of prisoners, execution (murder) of bound prisoners (yes both sides did this), deliberate bombing of cities and villages with napalm and white phosphorus (both in North as well as South Korea) by the U.S. and its allies in the Korean War. Just like Vietnam, we also called them "gooks." Of course, our view of this period in history is distorted by the fact that our fawning corporate media isn't going to report this either.

Thus we are left with a glorified, prowar porn version of history.

Frmrsldr wrote:

The Korean (civil) War (1950-present) is most tragic of all because it wasn't caused by Koreans but by the U.S. and U.S.S.R. governments. Yet it is Koreans who suffer the most.

Stupid, isn't it?

Stupid no, tragically Korean yes. As I've said before wars, invasions and civil strife are not modern additions to Korea's history.