• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

North Korea reportedly fires at South

There are two things you could mean by that. 1. they are financing terrorists who are killing American soldiers or 2. they are actually killing American citizens. For 1, we're killing their guys, and we most likely sent that new virus which messed with their nuke program. And if you want to say 2 is happening, back it up with a credible source.

You want evidence? Ok. Here you go: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/03/world/middleeast/03iraq.html?_r=1
 
Wrong. This means China has to make sure the DPRK doesn't piss us off, or we kill them, and they've lost a Communist friend, and a buffer from South Korea. And if they go to war with us, they can kiss the money we owe them good-bye, along with all the money they might make in the future.

America can't harm China financially without committing suicide.
 
Hopeless hyper-partisanship is a waste of resources.

That depends on one's objective.
 
I have been doing Thanksgiving stuff the past few days can anyone give me an update on whats happening with Korea?
 
I have been doing Thanksgiving stuff the past few days can anyone give me an update on whats happening with Korea?

How did you find your way here?
 
America can't harm China financially without committing suicide.

Absolutely wrong. Its the exact opposite. We have demand, and we have supply. We are their demand, and if they attack us, they lose that demand, along with all the money we owe them.
 
If you bothered to read what I said, I asked for evidence that Iranians have directly killed American Citizens or Soldiers, not whether they financed terrorists who end up killing our soldiers. You obviously can't meet your burden of proof, so just admit you're wrong.

Iran funding terrorists is directly killing Americans. i.e. without the funding, the terrorists wouldn't have been able to kill the Americans.

Why are people so willing to give the bad guys a break?
 
Iran funding terrorists is directly killing Americans. i.e. without the funding, the terrorists wouldn't have been able to kill the Americans.

Why are people so willing to give the bad guys a break?

They are giving weapons to terrorists, along with other resources, and then send them off. Later on those guys attack our soldies. And don't get all butt-hurt about me saying the Iranians aren't directly killing our troops. Anyone who funds terrorists needs to meet some members of our military, and regardless of whether they directly have blood in their hands, its still there.

The point I was making with this was that the American people would be pissed if the Iranians directly attacked/killed our troops. Using terrorists isn't direct, if they sent an army unit in which killed a soldier or two before getting massacred, we the people would be pissed.
 
They are giving weapons to terrorists, along with other resources, and then send them off. Later on those guys attack our soldies. And don't get all butt-hurt about me saying the Iranians aren't directly killing our troops. Anyone who funds terrorists needs to meet some members of our military, and regardless of whether they directly have blood in their hands, its still there.

The point I was making with this was that the American people would be pissed if the Iranians directly attacked/killed our troops. Using terrorists isn't direct, if they sent an army unit in which killed a soldier or two before getting massacred, we the people would be pissed.

I'm pissed off, that they're funding terrorists that kill Americans. Aren't you?
 
I'm pissed off, that they're funding terrorists that kill Americans. Aren't you?

Yeah, but I'm slightly satisfied we're killing those terrorists, and we're f**king up their nuke program (or at least somebody is). If they attacked us with their army I'd be even happier because then we have an excuse to take out the rest of the crazies. Until we get a reason to invade Iran, we can't do that, and them killing our soldiers with their army is a perfect reason to invade.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but I'm slightly satisfied we're killing those terrorists, and we're f**king up their nuke program (or at least somebody is). If they attacked us with their army I'd be even happier because then we have an excuse to take out the rest of the crazies. Until we get a reason to invade Iran, we can't do that, and them killing our soldiers with their army is a perfect reason to invade.

Here ya go.

Captured Iranian Qods Force officer a regional commander in Iraq - The Long War Journal
 
No its just a waste of everyone's time. And could you learn how to use the quote button???

And not bold everything? It's just like all caps that make one appear he is yelling.
 
I have been doing Thanksgiving stuff the past few days can anyone give me an update on whats happening with Korea?

U.S. manuvers with South Korea started noon today. China is not happy and calling for an emergency meeting. North Korea is as usual swinging their rusty sabre making threats of grave repercussions if the maneuvers go forth.

The Island previously shelled was ordered to be evacuated after NK shelling but the evacuation was called off due to the shells not actually hitting the island.
 
Last edited:
U.S. manuvers with South Korea started noon today. China is not happy and calling for an emergency meeting. North Korea is as usual swinging their rusty sabre making threats of grave repercussions if the maneuvers go forth.

The Island previously shelled was ordered to be evacuated after NK shelling but the evacuation was called off due to the shells not actually hitting the island.

Have they burned any American flags yet?
 
U.S. manuvers with South Korea started noon today. China is not happy and calling for an emergency meeting. North Korea is as usual swinging their rusty sabre making threats of grave repercussions if the maneuvers go forth.

The Island previously shelled was ordered to be evacuated after NK shelling but the evacuation was called off due to the shells not actually hitting the island.

Thank you for the update sir. Also I just noticed this. Why do you quote a fictional book like it is real apdst?
 
Wrong. This means China has to make sure the DPRK doesn't piss us off, or we kill them, and they've lost a Communist friend, and a buffer from South Korea. And if they go to war with us, they can kiss the money we owe them good-bye, along with all the money they might make in the future.

America can't harm China financially without committing suicide.

So losing your biggest customer isn't a problem whatsoever? Apparently no experience in business?

The truth be known I think it would work negatively both ways if it trade was suddenly cut off.
 
If you bothered to read what I said, I asked for evidence that Iranians have directly killed American Citizens or Soldiers, not whether they financed terrorists who end up killing our soldiers. You obviously can't meet your burden of proof, so just admit you're wrong.

I'm wrong. But the Americans are still dead as a desert night aren't they regardless of the Iranian sponsorship of their deaths and mutilations?
 
So losing your biggest customer isn't a problem whatsoever? Apparently no experience in business?

The truth be known I think it would work negatively both ways if it trade was suddenly cut off.

Yup, you must be right. And with that our conversation comes to a conclusion. It was a pleasure meeting you.
 
"...4) It is a myth that America cannot fight two, three, and what ever number comes up, simultaneously. We have engaged across the world and fought multiple enemies at the same time circa 1943..."

That was a different American people. Americans today are not capable of united action against foreign powers. One side or the other will use a foreign war for domestic political purposes. That means America can no longer win wars.

1) Afghanistan. -The pundits screamed wildly that the Tali-Ban would not be removed from power easily and that we couldn't maintain a war where Soviets lost. They were wrong.

2) Iraq. -The pundits screamed wildly the whole time about how we are stretched too thin and couldn't fight two wars (even though they were both about the same failed civilization). They were wrong. The pundits were bold in their statements that Baghdad couldnot be taken. They were wrong. The pundits were bold in their statements that Iraqis wouldn't vote. They were wrong. The pundits boldly declared that Iraq was in the state of grave civil war and that the Sunni would never come around. They were wrong. The pundits declared boldly that Al-Queda in Iraq would never be defeated. They were wrong.

3) North Korea. - We have an entire III MEF waiting in the Pacific for exactly this war. They are largely not a part of this "War on Terror." Along with them is the South Korean force that will fight for their own lands unlike what Afghanis are doing and unlike what Iraqis were capable of. Today, the pundits are beginning to declare boldly that our military is stretched too thin and that nothing good will come from a war against North Korea.


Along the way, the pundits have forecasted failure and accused our military of not being better practitioners of war than Soviet troops. They had declared us failures in Iraq the entire way and toldus that we would never bring it to a close. And now they simply dismiss us as non-existent in the Pacific. The pundits have been wrong every single time, because they are too focused on predicting negativity and failure at all cost. You see, it's safer to assume failure and to be wrong than it is to assume victory and be wrong. They have proven to be ignorant of their military and of their own culture. I would think that at some point, the pundits would simply slash their own wrists and acknowledge that they are absolutely worthless and near traitorous. And let's not pretend that some former Army Generals, who's idea of this world can't fathom the absence of a Cold War, haven't had their heads up their asses as well.


I am not interested in what never-enlisted-civilian pundits have to say about what our military is capable of. And keep in mind that enlistment into the military has been without a draft this whole time and that the Marine Corps has made its numbers every single year. The Army, despite having some troubles, are hardly struggling for volunteers. Americans are more capable of rising above the ignorant cowardly pundit than you think.
 
Last edited:
The point I was making with this was that the American people would be pissed if the Iranians directly attacked/killed our troops. Using terrorists isn't direct, if they sent an army unit in which killed a soldier or two before getting massacred, we the people would be pissed.

Well, the American people were absolutely pissed when Al-Queda was being harbored by the Tali-Ban and decided that they were just as guilty. I'm not sure your point addresses the realty. If Iran's funding goes to a terrorist organization to kill Americans, then that terrorist organization is merely a proxy for Iran's bidding.

But let's be real. "We the People" could care less about any soldier, Marine, sailor, or airman that died throughout the 90s due to terrorist activity until 9/11 and "We the People" wanted revenge for the death of civilians. "We the People" have been proven to be hypocrits, selfish, and plain mean to its military. "Support the Troop" came with criticisms, insults, political grandstanding, and accusations of evil acts by "We the People" ever since they demanded we go out and murder and slaughter, for them....not us.

We were dying and were ignored before 9/11.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom