Page 42 of 53 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 529

Thread: North Korea reportedly fires at South

  1. #411
    Norville Rogers
    Kernel Sanders's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 10:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,730

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Yonhap is reporting that North Korea has fired at Yeonpyeong again, though none of the shells landed on the island itself

    South Korea's military had ordered civilians on a border island to evacuate to shelters, military officials said Sunday, after hearing sounds of "several rounds" of artillery firing, though no shells landed on the island.

    While the emergency evacuation order on Yeonpyeong Island, devastated by North Korea's artillery attack on Tuesday, was lifted, military officials said they are keeping a close watch on the movements of the North's coastline artillery batteries as they maintain a "ready-to-fire" posture.

    "The evacuation order was issued after sounds of several rounds of North Korea's artillery were heard on Yeonpyeong," said an official at the South's Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).

    The JCS official said, however, the distant sounds of artillery firing came from the North's firing training inside its territory, not the coastline artillery near the island
    Link
    Yonhap twitter feed

  2. #412
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by repeter View Post
    IED's demonized the war. But really, it exposed the inherent problem behind the war: the public didn't expect it to become an occupation. If we'd gone in, lost the same amount of soldiers against the Iraqi Army, and then gotten out, the public would be pissed, but they would be satisfied in the knowledge that we whupped up on the guys who did it to us. With IED's, we don't always find the lucky a**hole with a shovel and mortar shell, instead all we see is our Humvees getting blown to pieces.

    In a lot of ways, the media made it worse, but the problem was there to begin with, on a fundamental level: we hate fighting and enemy we can't see, and we want to watch our enemies get the sh*t beaten out of them. Thats what we're missing from this war, and fear-mongering also makes for better ratings. Honestly, the media isn't trying to undermine anything, and to think that is absurd. Our media is only there to make money, and they need ratings for that.
    I believe that anybody, with a little common sense, knew that there was going to be a post war security mission. Afterall, the lack of a post-war strategy in Afghanistan, is why were had to go back to Afghanistan; and ultimately, ther reason we had to go back to Iraq.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #413
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    The IEDs had a massive impact on the actual war and I include the war for public opinion in that as well. However as far as degrading our combat effectiveness in traditional military thinking, they weren't a major threat. By that I mean we still had a military on the ground which could move, engage, etc. But this wasn't a traditional war, the objective often had nothing to do with traditional military fighting, and a single IED or threat of an IED could by itself could massively undermine US power in the area.

    Part of that war was to protect the locals, which became very difficult not only when they were fighting each other but when they, and outside groups, used IEDs and other unconventional methods.
    Not every single IED attack or threat made it onto news in the US, however it had real impacts within Iraq, on the Soldiers, and on the operational environment even if it was never reported or heard about in the US.

    Now as far as your anti-war media trying to lose the war for the US, well if you're going to argue a conspiracy theory provide evidence of their intent to do that or go to the proper forum.

    Care to point out where the mainstream media made any effort, other than to pronounce the war a massive failure, from the git-go?

    Just like Walter Kronkite, during Vietnam, when he did everything he could undermine the war effort.

    Not a conspiracy, just a fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #414
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    The IEDs had a massive impact on the actual war and I include the war for public opinion in that as well.

    IEDs had a greater impact on the civilian at home, far from any danger, than it did for combat operations inside Iraq.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    Now as far as your anti-war media trying to lose the war for the US, well if you're going to argue a conspiracy theory provide evidence....
    His point is very valid. Drama sells papers. Civilians buy papers. Civilains form opinons around that drama. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy. It's just good business for which the average civilian is to stupid to cipher. If you wish to pretend that the media seeks out good stories to tell the average fat ass back home in a hopes that drama no longer sells, then perhaps you should discover a few uncomfortable truths. Your idea that the IED was impacting this war on the ground to some overwhelming degree is evidence that you paid too much attention to the media for your guidance. IEDs were a nuisance, but it did not alter operations. Another one was the "grand Iraqi Civil War" that simply vanished. How much of that little bit of media drama did you swallow? Or that Iraqis would never vote. Or that failure was behind every corner.

    By the way, justabuba thanked your post. That should probably tell you how far off you are.
    Last edited by MSgt; 11-28-10 at 01:19 AM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  5. #415
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    IEDs had a greater impact on the civilian at home, far from any danger, than it did for combat operations inside Iraq.




    His point is very valid. Drama sells papers. Civilians buy papers. Civilains form opinons around that drama. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy. It's just good business for which the average civilian is to stupid to cipher. If you wish to pretend that the media seeks out good stories to tell the average fat ass back home in a hopes that drama no longer sells, then perhaps you should discover a few uncomfortable truths. Your idea that the IED was impoacxting this war on the ground is evidence that you paid tomuch attention to the media for your guidance. Another one wasthe "grand Iraqi Civil War" that simply vanished. How much of that little bit of media drama did you swallow?

    By the way, justabuba thanked your post. That should probably tell you how far off you are.
    Laughed my snuff, right out of my lip...thanks!
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #416
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    IEDs had a greater impact on the civilian at home, far from any danger, than it did for combat operations inside Iraq.

    His point is very valid. Drama sells papers. Civilians buy papers. Civilains form opinons around that drama. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy. It's just good business for which the average civilian is to stupid to cipher. If you wish to pretend that the media seeks out good stories to tell the average fat ass back home in a hopes that drama no longer sells, then perhaps you should discover a few uncomfortable truths. Your idea that the IED was impacting this war on the ground to some overwhelming degree is evidence that you paid too much attention to the media for your guidance. IEDs were a nuisance, but it did not alter operations. Another one was the "grand Iraqi Civil War" that simply vanished. How much of that little bit of media drama did you swallow? Or that Iraqis would never vote. Or that failure was behind every corner.

    By the way, justabuba thanked your post. That should probably tell you how far off you are.
    In my opinions IEDs defined the combat environment in Iraq, primarily because it slowed everything down so much for US forces. As well as being a transporter, IEDs define my operations in so many ways. Where I can go, how I get there, when I leave, how fast do I drive, how far apart the trucks are, etc etc.

    And if we consider IEDs as part of a wider guerrilla warfare strategy, than it also defined our conflict to win over the locals. They also had to put up with that constant fear and being asked to trust US forces for security while at the same time knowing the US couldnt protect them from everything was very difficult.

    Now as for your 2nd paragraph, you're are talking about something completely different. I don't disagree in the least that drama sells, in fact that in my opinion is what the primary motivator was for many news outlets to talk about the war, along with with the fact that the war was also actual news.

    HOWEVER, apdst was arguing the media was anti-war, not that they were drama loving or that they wanted to use the war for profit to sell papers and newstime. No, he said they were anti war and broadcast-ed so much news about IEDs because they had a topic "could blow out of proportion, so as to undermine the American war effort."

    See the difference? Perhaps you should take a bit of time out of your self-righteous textual vomit figure out what people are talking about.

    And lastly about Justbubba thanking me, I'm glad to see you two still believe in guilt by association.

  7. #417
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    In my opinions IEDs defined the combat environment in Iraq, primarily because it slowed everything down so much for US forces. As well as being a transporter, IEDs define my operations in so many ways. Where I can go, how I get there, when I leave, how fast do I drive, how far apart the trucks are, etc etc.

    And if we consider IEDs as part of a wider guerrilla warfare strategy, than it also defined our conflict to win over the locals. They also had to put up with that constant fear and being asked to trust US forces for security while at the same time knowing the US couldnt protect them from everything was very difficult.

    Now as for your 2nd paragraph, you're are talking about something completely different. I don't disagree in the least that drama sells, in fact that in my opinion is what the primary motivator was for many news outlets to talk about the war, along with with the fact that the war was also actual news.

    HOWEVER, apdst was arguing the media was anti-war, not that they were drama loving or that they wanted to use the war for profit to sell papers and newstime. No, he said they were anti war and broadcast-ed so much news about IEDs because they had a topic "could blow out of proportion, so as to undermine the American war effort."

    See the difference? Perhaps you should take a bit of time out of your self-righteous textual vomit figure out what people are talking about.

    And lastly about Justbubba thanking me, I'm glad to see you two still believe in guilt by association.

    That's why it's called a, "battlefield", bro. It doesn't matter if it's high-speed booby-traps, hyper-accurate arty, or bows and arrows, those weapons and tactics will dictate where you go, how you get there and what you do, while you are there.

    The dynamics of the modern battlefield are infinite.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  8. #418
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    That's why it's called a, "battlefield", bro. It doesn't matter if it's high-speed booby-traps, hyper-accurate arty, or bows and arrows, those weapons and tactics will dictate where you go, how you get there and what you do, while you are there.

    The dynamics of the modern battlefield are infinite.
    So we agree they define/dictate the battlefield?

  9. #419
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    So we agree they define/dictate the battlefield?
    Yes, but no morese than any other weapon/tactic--the use of IED's isn't a strategy, either, BTW.

    My point, is that they in no way defined success, or the lack there of.

    Hell, the scuttlebutt I've heard from Iraq vets, is that escaping an armored humvee, after it was hit, was the really dangerous part.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #420
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,496

    Re: North Korea reportedly fires at South

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    So we agree they define/dictate the battlefield?
    Yes, but no morese than any other weapon/tactic--the use of IED's isn't a strategy, either, BTW.

    My point, is that they in no way defined success, or the lack there of.

    Hell, the scuttlebutt I've heard from Iraq vets, is that escaping an armored humvee, after it was hit, was the really dangerous part.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 42 of 53 FirstFirst ... 32404142434452 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •