Oprano Adult Industry Forums - View Single Post

PornoDoggy · 04-08-2003

Uhhhh ... do you think it's just a coincidence that the folks in Washington are taking a far more traditional diplomatic approach to the North Korean dispute than they are to Saddam? I for one am glad as hell they are.

This whole scenario is a clusterfuck waiting to happen. Events in Iraq have likely made it more difficult, and not just because of its effect on the North Koreans. Hopefully a diplomatic solution is found soon, because it's causing all kinds of tensions and will likely lead to an arms race in the region, particularly if Japan decides to rearm to a greater extent than they already are.

We don't have enough troops in the theater to defend South Korea against an attack from the North, and probably haven't since the mid 1960s. Presidents, Democrats and Republicans, since Johnson diverted troops to 'Nam, have turned down DOD requests to strengthen the forces. Just about every war scenario that's been gamed out has involved the loss of Seoul and a million or so South Koreans, and most of the 30-40K U.S. troops that are stationed there. They are there as much as a deterent as they are a military force.

So I just wonder what razzle-dazzle plan people have for "taking care of the North Koreans." See, we did kick their ass the last time we were there. However, another power was concerned that OUR presence on their border represented a threat to THEIR national security intervened and damn near kicked our asses, after the "defeatists" in Washington were warned it would never happen.

You think, in view of the events in the Middle East, they're likely to think any different?

04-08-2003	#9
PornoDoggy Cramming 3 people in a Room to Attend Show Want to see your own Advertising Here! Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Amid the Cornfields of Illinois Posts: 5,366	Uhhhh ... do you think it's just a coincidence that the folks in Washington are taking a far more traditional diplomatic approach to the North Korean dispute than they are to Saddam? I for one am glad as hell they are. This whole scenario is a clusterfuck waiting to happen. Events in Iraq have likely made it more difficult, and not just because of its effect on the North Koreans. Hopefully a diplomatic solution is found soon, because it's causing all kinds of tensions and will likely lead to an arms race in the region, particularly if Japan decides to rearm to a greater extent than they already are. We don't have enough troops in the theater to defend South Korea against an attack from the North, and probably haven't since the mid 1960s. Presidents, Democrats and Republicans, since Johnson diverted troops to 'Nam, have turned down DOD requests to strengthen the forces. Just about every war scenario that's been gamed out has involved the loss of Seoul and a million or so South Koreans, and most of the 30-40K U.S. troops that are stationed there. They are there as much as a deterent as they are a military force. So I just wonder what razzle-dazzle plan people have for "taking care of the North Koreans." See, we did kick their ass the last time we were there. However, another power was concerned that OUR presence on their border represented a threat to THEIR national security intervened and damn near kicked our asses, after the "defeatists" in Washington were warned it would never happen. You think, in view of the events in the Middle East, they're likely to think any different? __________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...