North Korean sinking of a South Korean warship

[Funcioneta]

@Dylan:

@idk_iam_swiss:

I bet this will get locked and/or deleted. But you Americans need to stop getting involved in Asia. You don’t know how it works; And its none of your business. Let the two nations do what they want.

I am not American  :evil:

What are you babbling? Suppossing that your nick reveals wich country are you from, you are as American as a Brazilian or as a Cuba or as a USA’s citizen  :roll:

Man, your language lacks a proper term for “USA’s citizen”. Yankee has negative connotations and is not accurate anyway for, say, Georgia or Florida  :|

[Funcioneta]

@MrMalachiCrunch:

No slight against my cousins to the south in the US of A, but they seem to have appropriated the name ‘American’.

It’s funny you say that, because it’s exactly the oppossite. USA’s citizens have appropiated the word ‘American’, at least in English  :lol:

[Funcioneta]

@MrMalachiCrunch:

I’m not in favour of letting 2 nations ‘do what they want’ when one nation wants peace and prosparity for it’s people and the other nation has nukes and wants to conquer the other peaceful nation.  I’m not sure what the answer is but it can’t be “Let the bully win”.

Mexico 1848, Cuba 1898, Guatemala 1954, Chile 1973, Granada 1983 … the bully won all the times (well, in 1848 and 1898 they had not nukes yet)
North Korea has a really bad ruler, true, but you have to apply the same rules for all bullies

[MrMalachiCrunch]

I thought that’s what I said…that the citizens of the USA have taken over the term ‘American’ to refer to themselves.  A noteworthy missing country was Iran 1953.  http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/

Besides, this is entirely different.

In this case, the original attack was on a UN protectorate and the answer was relief by the UN.  My uncle saw action in Korea and came back with only 1 ear drum, luckily that is all he lost, I assure you he was not American or United Statesian as they should be called :-)  Technically, N. Korea violated a UN ceasefire and the response will be from the UN.  If N. Korea starts a war, the UN will respond and of course the US of A being the big dawg with the big bite will be at the forefront of the UN response.

Perhaps in those cases you cited the world should have said something, but more often than not, its the rest of the worlds corporate elites that benefit from many of the military actions of the few so they sit back and profit as in BP and Iran 1953.  Lots of people think BP had its roots as British Petroleum but no, it was British Persian.

It’s a different world now, repeating past mistakes is no way to move forwards.  Doing nothing means over a dozen countries going nuclear to defend themselves.  Great discussion so far by the way!

[idk_iam_swiss]

But its expensive and wasteful o fight everyone else’s battles for them. Its also a bit insulting in my opinion. It says that the smaller nations are too stupid to know whats best for them.

[Jermofoot]

@221B:

S. Korea’s economy is nearly the size of Germany’s and a war could set off a world wide recession.  If it goes nuclear, the fallout could affect large parts of heavily populated areas of the world (China, Japan, Korea, maybe even the USA and Canada).  To say the USA or EU has no interest in what happens in Korea is, I think, a bit simplistic.  But I certainly do not relish the idea of another land war in Asia.

Since when do wars cause recessions?  Historically, it has been quite the opposite.

I don’t think it would go beyond a local conflict.  Yes, many would get involved, but I doubt you’d see the likes of the Korean War 50 years ago.  I do think China and perhaps Japan are key players here.  North Korea has always been quite stubborn, but no one wants to take the effort to deal with them - you’d be in charge of millions on welfare.

@Funcioneta:

@MrMalachiCrunch:

I’m not in favour of letting 2 nations ‘do what they want’ when one nation wants peace and prosparity for it’s people and the other nation has nukes and wants to conquer the other peaceful nation.  I’m not sure what the answer is but it can’t be “Let the bully win”.

Mexico 1848, Cuba 1898, Guatemala 1954, Chile 1973, Granada 1983 … the bully won all the times (well, in 1848 and 1898 they had not nukes yet)
North Korea has a really bad ruler, true, but you have to apply the same rules for all bullies

Please, don’t stop there.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

Perhaps in those cases you cited the world should have said something, but more often than not, its the rest of the worlds corporate elites that benefit from many of the military actions of the few so they sit back and profit as in BP and Iran 1953.  Lots of people think BP had its roots as British Petroleum but no, it was British Persian.

BP = British Petroleum.  I’ve never heard of British Persian and apparently neither has Google.  The same BP that is screwing up the Gulf of Mexico played a major role in overthrowing Iran.

[MrMalachiCrunch]

Google using these 4 words: british persian oil company

You should get about 932,000 results

If you go to advance search and use the exact phrase

“british-persian oil company”

You do get less results but over a 4000, albietly, many seem to be repeats.  Hmmm, I did a repeat of the search and now its only a few 100, strange.  It seems it was Anglo-Persian and some have changed it to British-Persian and its been repeated often enough to be almost right.  In any event, it was British and Iranian, then the brits got the CIA to overthrow a democratically elected government and replace it with the much hated shaw……  And now there ain’t much Perisan in BP anymore.  I don’t think this version of ‘America’ is much like that one, still, there are some echos from the past we must all be watchful for.

So I am not sure what version of Google we are using, must be the dot uh oh version, I hear its really buggy.  Never get version dot uh oh, wait until at least dot oh one…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_Oil_Company

http://www.oilcompanies.net/oil1.htm

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/80326/BP-PLC

Now as far as smaller nations wanting to sort it out.  What about treaties?  In any event, its probably not cheaper to have a nuclear arms race between 20 asian pacific countries if North Korea where given the green light to invade the south.  The only reason Japan has not gone nuclear (which they could in about 2 weeks or less) is the protection of the US.  The only reason China has only about 100 nukes that can hit the US is because nobody else is an existential threat to them.  Now if Japan and other nearby nations went nuclear how many nukes would China feel it would require for proper deterence?  I don’t see how allowing war to occur which would result in a nuclear arms race is cheaper in the long run.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Funcioneta:

North Korea has a really bad ruler, true, but you have to apply the same rules for all bullies

I dont think the question should be who attacked who or who is a bully and who isnt. The question should  be which bully has the better system? which bully would you like to live under?

Once you know the nations worth living in, you also know the nations worth fighting for.

Blood and money makes the world go round, being morally outraged that nations would use force to resolve a dispute dosnt get around that.

[MrMalachiCrunch]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/yankee

I don’t see anything about Cuba, Brazil or Canada in this:

Yan·kee   /ˈyæŋki/  Show Spelled[yang-kee]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a native or inhabitant of the United States.
2. a native or inhabitant of New England.
3. a native or inhabitant of a northern U.S. state, esp. of one of the northeastern states that sided with the Union in the American Civil War.
4. a federal or northern soldier in the American Civil War.
5. a word used in communications to represent the letter Y.
6. Military . the NATO name for a class of Soviet ballistic missile submarine, nuclear powered, with up to 16 missile launchers.
–adjective
7. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a Yankee or Yankees: Yankee ingenuity.

[Jermofoot]

@Dylan:

@MrMalachiCrunch:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/yankee

I don’t see anything about Cuba, Brazil or Canada in this:

Yan·kee   /ˈyæŋki/  Show Spelled[yang-kee]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a native or inhabitant of the United States.
2. a native or inhabitant of New England.
3. a native or inhabitant of a northern U.S. state, esp. of one of the northeastern states that sided with the Union in the American Civil War.
4. a federal or northern soldier in the American Civil War.
5. a word used in communications to represent the letter Y.
6. Military . the NATO name for a class of Soviet ballistic missile submarine, nuclear powered, with up to 16 missile launchers.
–adjective
7. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a Yankee or Yankees: Yankee ingenuity.

It’s all relational.  Just think of yourself as the extreme, so-south-I’m-north southerner.

[Omega]

It appears that some Chinese were killed at the frontiers, which could isolate North Korea even more

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Jermofoot:

@Dylan:

@MrMalachiCrunch:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/yankee

I don’t see anything about Cuba, Brazil or Canada in this:

Yan·kee   /ˈyæŋki/  Show Spelled[yang-kee]  Show IPA
–noun
1. a native or inhabitant of the United States.
2. a native or inhabitant of New England.
3. a native or inhabitant of a northern U.S. state, esp. of one of the northeastern states that sided with the Union in the American Civil War.
4. a federal or northern soldier in the American Civil War.
5. a word used in communications to represent the letter Y.
6. Military . the NATO name for a class of Soviet ballistic missile submarine, nuclear powered, with up to 16 missile launchers.
–adjective
7. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a Yankee or Yankees: Yankee ingenuity.

It’s all relational.  Just think of yourself as the extreme, so-south-I’m-north southerner.

The silly’s keep getting rid of my anti-south posts, so let me rephrase this, I’m not south!!!

One more thing Florida is nice, but the fact is it’s still south

[Imperious Leader]

No rather we get rid of the vulgar language. NO F words whatsoever.

[idk_iam_swiss]

Thank you. There have been a lot of new accounts lately that think this is 4chan. When its not

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Imperious:

No rather we get rid of the vulgar language. NO F words whatsoever.

wow, someone should of told met this earlier

[Jermofoot]

@idk_iam_swiss:

Thank you. There have been a lot of new accounts lately that think this is 4chan. When its not

Yup, no Anonymous around…(although I think it’s called “Guest” here)

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Jermofoot:

@idk_iam_swiss:

Thank you. There have been a lot of new accounts lately that think this is 4chan. When its not

Yup, no Anonymous around…(although I think it’s called “Guest” here)

I have seen anonymous on old, old, old posts like when I read Imperious Leader’s first few posts.

[idk_iam_swiss]

No Im just sick of all the smiley’s and terrible spelling. And getting people who don’t know that trolling is out of style.

[Jermofoot]

@idk_iam_swiss:

No Im just sick of all the smiley’s and terrible spelling. And getting people who don’t know that trolling is out of style.

It will always be a fad, but I don’t think there is much trolling going on around here…

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Jermofoot:

@idk_iam_swiss:

No Im just sick of all the smiley’s and terrible spelling. And getting people who don’t know that trolling is out of style.

It will always be a fad, but I don’t think there is much trolling going on around here…

Well, it depends what you can handle, like heres some examples and the rates of it

“what’s this game, can you fly in it?” Thats full trolling
“Is it Russia or USSR in the game?” That’s about 75 percent trolling
“Will Spain be playable, in Europe 40?” Thats about half trolling (maybe more.)