|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
waltjocketty
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
English_Ocean
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Location: You don't have the right to abuse me!
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Tell me please if I've gotten this right.
North Korea starts counterfeiting US dollars in a hugh way. So the US freezes NK bank accounts and orders santions. In response NK wants to nuke the US? Right?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
waltjocketty
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's definitely more complicated than that, but yes. They're insane up North. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
English_Ocean
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Location: You don't have the right to abuse me!
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LOL I think my gray matter is turning grayer!
Yet, there is something to be said about insanity.
I just don't know what it is.  Is there yellow dye in noodles? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roch
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| English_Ocean wrote: |
Tell me please if I've gotten this right.
North Korea starts counterfeiting US dollars in a hugh way. So the US freezes NK bank accounts and orders santions. In response NK wants to nuke the US? Right?
:lol: |
A crack squad of patriotoc gyopos eager to prove their loyalty to the United Statres of America could go to N.Korea and execute the whole lot of 'em. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
The U.S. through years of "cold war" pretended to be battling a titanic struggle with evil. We now know that they over estimated the Russians capabilities by thousands of percent, a country that had a hard time despite all its resources, of even keeping its lights on. Very well documented now, the ruse. How idiotic the state dept. , the spy agencies, the whole apparatus in charge of foreign affairs.
Now the ever continuing N.Korea saga. Yes, they have a huge number of people, an army. But all this talk of missles etc...is just for the U.S. govt to continue with defense spending, to continue feeding the money up the food chain.
Two recent articles foreshadow how once again, down the road, we will see that there is no monster in the kitchen and was no threat to America - save the one she fed and nurtured..... And despite calls otherwise, I don't think this leopard is going to be changing its spots.
| Quote: |
U.S. spy agencies now admit they don't know it all
By Mark Mazzetti Published: March 2, 2007
WASHINGTON: For more than three years, American intelligence officials have insisted that they learned from their mistakes in the months leading to the Iraq war, when murky information about Saddam Hussein's weapons programs was presented as fact and inconclusive judgments were hardened into statements of near certainty.
The more calibrated intelligence assessments that have come to light in recent weeks, particularly on Iran and North Korea, appear to show a new willingness by U.S. spy agencies to concede the limits of their knowledge. |
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/02/news/intel.php
| Quote: |
U.S. concedes uncertainty on North Korean uranium effort
By David E. Sanger and William J. Broad Published: February 28, 2007
WASHINGTON: Last October, the North Koreans tested their first nuclear device, the fruition of decades of work to make a weapon out of plutonium.
For nearly five years, though, the Bush administration, based on intelligence estimates, has accused North Korea of also pursuing a secret, parallel path to a bomb, using enriched uranium. That accusation, first leveled in the fall of 2002, resulted in the rupture of an already tense relationship: The United States cut off oil supplies, and the North Koreans responded by throwing out international inspectors, building up their plutonium arsenal and, ultimately, producing that first plutonium bomb.
But now, American intelligence officials are publicly softening their position, admitting to doubts about how much progress the uranium enrichment program has actually made. The result has been new questions about the Bush administration's decision to confront North Korea in 2002.
The disclosure underscores broader questions about the ability of intelligence agencies to discern the precise status of foreign weapons programs. The original assessment about North Korea came during the same period that the administration was building its case about Iraq's unconventional weapons programs, which turned out to be based on flawed intelligence. And the new North Korea assessment comes amid debate over intelligence about Iran's weapons. |
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/01/asia/web-0301korea.php
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ddeubel's Nonsense Version wrote: |
| The U.S. through years of "cold war" pretended to be battling a titanic struggle with evil. We now know that they over estimated the Russians capabilities by thousands of percent, a country that had a hard time despite all its resources, of even keeping its lights on. Very well documented now, the ruse. How idiotic the state dept. , the spy agencies, the whole apparatus in charge of foreign affairs. |
| Gopher's Edited Version wrote: |
The U.S., through years of [alleged] "cold war," pretended to be [fighting] a titanic struggle...We now know that they [exaggerated or perhaps even fabricated out of whole cloth] the Russians' capabilities...
[Yet, Soviet Russia was] a country that had a hard time -- despite all its resources -- even keeping its lights on. [This is]...documented now -- [this] ruse. How idiotic the State Dept., the spy agencies, the whole [military-industrial complex]... |
First, I edited this so that it might make sense.
Second, I find it amazing how people of your ideological persuasion have satisfied themselves on this point and now present it as uncontested, objective fact.
But this is just Chomsky's (and other hostile critics') post-9/11, post-Iraqi War, undeniably antiAmerican, Cold War revisionism. I reject this, Ddeubel, as do many others.
To understand why, please explain the Soviets in Eastern Europe; the Soviets in Cuba, and through Castro, Latin America and the Caribbean and also SubSaharan Africa; and then the Soviets in Afghanistan and Nicaragua, Ddeubel.
Let us start here...
Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin, The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World;
Cole Blasier, The Giant's Rival: The USSR and Latin America;
Aleksandr Fursenko and Timothy Naftali, Khrushchev's Cold War: The Inside Story of an American Adversary;
Piero Gleijeses, Conflicting Missions: Havana, Washington, and Africa 1959-1976;
Galia Golan, The Soviet Union and National Liberation Movements in the Third World; and
Ilya Prizel, Latin America through Soviet Eyes: The Evolution of Soviet Perceptions during the Brezhnev Era 1964-1982.
I trust that you have read these and other published accounts, no? I will not hold you accountable for the primary sources I am prepared to cite (declassified Russian documents). But I will hold you accountable for familiarizing yourself with more than Chomsky's theories. You really ought to know matters of substance as well, Ddeubel.
Do you...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ciote all you want. None of that changes the facts as stated by dd. I can find any number of sources to both support and repudiate any issue I wish to put forward. YOUR implied claim to a greater understaqnding is pure bullshit. Go ahead, cite your cources. Then others can be cited, then more. So what?
The hysteria about Russia's military power was both overestimated and intentionally lied. Much as Iraq was. Much as Iran is being lied about now.
Get over it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BLT, you have shirked the issues and questions and done little more than repeat the allegations.
I suppose you probably think the military-industrial complex fabricated Soviet missiles and placed them in Cuba, too...
I know you and Ddeubel -- and several others -- truly despise America. You especially reject everything related to the current Iraqi War. But this revisionist position you are taking that absolutely denounces the Cold War as a deception and a lie, and Ddeubel's defending North Korea by arguing absolutely no threat exists...Jesus.
On Soviet MiG aircraft and the Cuban Air Force...
And note the Soviet Hind-D deploying Sandinista troops in this series of pics... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
English_Ocean
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Location: You don't have the right to abuse me!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
First, I edited this so that it might make sense.
Second, I find it amazing how people of your ideological persuasion have satisfied themselves on this point and now present it as uncontested, objective fact.
But this is just Chomsky's (and other hostile critics') post-9/11, post-Iraqi War, undeniably antiAmerican, Cold War revisionism. I reject this, Ddeubel, as do many others.
To understand why, please explain the Soviets in Eastern Europe; the Soviets in Cuba, and through Castro, Latin America and the Caribbean and also SubSaharan Africa; and then the Soviets in Afghanistan and Nicaragua, Ddeubel. |
I will disregard the remark about "political persuasion". Sounds like you are a definite McCarthyite. Second, please refrain from editing and address your own "control" issues. I mean this in the wider sense of the expression -- seems you like to think you have it all covered etc......Not the case, as your references below attest. You box yourself in with whatever you've read -- label it as fact and stick with it. Without any consideration of if the information is "fact" or "real", in the sense that reflects reality.
This was indeed the issue during the cold war. You allude to Russians here, there and everywhere. Probably even hiding out in tents along the Potomac. Yes, Russian supported other nation with military hardware but did not have troops or individuals in these countries in other than a token fashion. Further, most Russian assistance was trade related, military and this alone showed their incapacity as a nation.
Anyone who lived in Russia during the 60s and 70s and especially the 80s, could vouch for the "tin man" hypothesis. Russia simply didn't even have the capacity to care for itself. See the real important work of those who lived there, attesting to this. Especially Smith's "The Russians". I'd also recommend "Improbable Dangers" by Robert Johnson as a correct analysis of Russian capacity.
You don't get it. A nation is only as strong as it itself is. Not anything else will make it different. I am not suggesting there was no threat from Russia or there also is none from N.Korea. There is. But the fact of the matter is that the threat is vastly exaggerated outside of the nuclear arena. Vastly and for political benefit. So when Russia exaggerated the evil of America and when Iran does the same or when Kim Jong Il screams of American aggression --- it is only a balancing act of the American rhetoric and propaganda.
America should be concerned with the truth. Like Russia, N.Korea is a poor, incapacitated regime. Containment until a natural death is the way to go, just like Russia. The lies, exaggerated lies of imminent invasion and threat to our way of life are and were just that.
I trust that you have read these and other published accounts, no? I will not hold you accountable for the primary sources I am prepared to cite (declassified Russian documents). But I will hold you accountable for familiarizing yourself with more than Chomsky's theories. You really ought to know matters of substance as well, Ddeubel.
Do you...?
Let me say that |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I trust that you have read these and other published accounts, no? I will not hold you accountable for the primary sources I am prepared to cite (declassified Russian documents). But I will hold you accountable for familiarizing yourself with more than Chomsky's theories. You really ought to know matters of substance as well, Ddeubel.
Do you...?
|
to continue, this posted early by error.
I have indeed read much about Communism and its history. More importantly I've seen with my own eyes and experienced the culture and country first hand. I've traveled the country and spoke the language. Your analysis is in a vacuum. Also I am no Chomskyite but would think his term, "Manufactured consent " appropriate to your own attitude regarding America and how she used future threats and exaggerations for domestic political, monetary and controlling gain. You are one of those minnows on that hook.
That seminal work, predicting the ultimate fall of Soviet communism, The Captive Mind, may be very appropriately applied to the U.S., now some years later. She will rot because her intellectuals truly are captive. All full of fabricated truth and they can't see out of their red,white and blue coloured glasses. The book is about how so many who are truly bright and gifted, are so ready to believe what they know are lies, just for political affiliation and power. Fits you and so many in America and elsewhere also, to a tea.
Paka,
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| Quote: |
First, I edited this so that it might make sense.
Second, I find it amazing how people of your ideological persuasion have satisfied themselves on this point and now present it as uncontested, objective fact.
But this is just Chomsky's (and other hostile critics') post-9/11, post-Iraqi War, undeniably antiAmerican, Cold War revisionism. I reject this, Ddeubel, as do many others.
To understand why, please explain the Soviets in Eastern Europe; the Soviets in Cuba, and through Castro, Latin America and the Caribbean and also SubSaharan Africa; and then the Soviets in Afghanistan and Nicaragua, Ddeubel. |
I will disregard the remark about "political persuasion". Sounds like you are a definite McCarthyite. Second, please refrain from editing and address your own "control" issues. I mean this in the wider sense of the expression -- seems you like to think you have it all covered etc......Not the case, as your references below attest. You box yourself in with whatever you've read -- label it as fact and stick with it. Without any consideration of if the information is "fact" or "real", in the sense that reflects reality.
This was indeed the issue during the cold war. You allude to Russians here, there and everywhere. Probably even hiding out in tents along the Potomac. Yes, Russian supported other nation with military hardware but did not have troops or individuals in these countries in other than a token fashion. Further, most Russian assistance was trade related, military and this alone showed their incapacity as a nation.
Anyone who lived in Russia during the 60s and 70s and especially the 80s, could vouch for the "tin man" hypothesis. Russia simply didn't even have the capacity to care for itself. See the real important work of those who lived there, attesting to this. Especially Smith's "The Russians". I'd also recommend "Improbable Dangers" by Robert Johnson as a correct analysis of Russian capacity.
You don't get it. A nation is only as strong as it itself is. Not anything else will make it different. I am not suggesting there was no threat from Russia or there also is none from N.Korea. There is. But the fact of the matter is that the threat is vastly exaggerated outside of the nuclear arena. Vastly and for political benefit. So when Russia exaggerated the evil of America and when Iran does the same or when Kim Jong Il screams of American aggression --- it is only a balancing act of the American rhetoric and propaganda.
America should be concerned with the truth. Like Russia, N.Korea is a poor, incapacitated regime. Containment until a natural death is the way to go, just like Russia. The lies, exaggerated lies of imminent invasion and threat to our way of life are and were just that.
I trust that you have read these and other published accounts, no? I will not hold you accountable for the primary sources I am prepared to cite (declassified Russian documents). But I will hold you accountable for familiarizing yourself with more than Chomsky's theories. You really ought to know matters of substance as well, Ddeubel.
Do you...?
Let me say that |
Just a couple of points. First it wasn't Russia as such..it was the U.S.S.R...sementics perhaps but bear with me and I will show why semantics in this case are important. (see point 2)
2. RUSSIA (now) is a nation which is increasing in wealth and power due to the oil it is exporting and is regarded as a growing threat. Reports of its demise were greatly exaggerated. And if the former U.S.S.R was really so poor how was it able to function for about 80 years or so? And how was it able to build thousands of nuclear missiles and warheads...way more than the U.S.A ever had?
Now they have a much smaller terrority and population to care for and as a consequence are able to spend more on military build-up if they so choose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Just a couple of points. First it wasn't Russia as such..it was the U.S.S.R...sementics perhaps but bear with me and I will show why semantics in this case are important. (see point 2)
2. RUSSIA (now) is a nation which is increasing in wealth and power due to the oil it is exporting and is regarded as a growing threat. Reports of its demise were greatly exaggerated. And if the former U.S.S.R was really so poor how was it able to function for about 80 years or so? And how was it able to build thousands of nuclear missiles and warheads...way more than the U.S.A ever had?
Now they have a much smaller terrority and population to care for and as a consequence are able to spend more on military build-up if they so choose. |
You are right to make the distinction between the Soviet Union and Russia.
As to the question of WHY? It has been shown from all angles that what we knew as the "U.S.S.R." was built on the misery and institutionalized slavery of large portions of the population. Terror and fear also. This allowed the nation to support itself beyond its means until the glass roof caved in. It also took and took and took from its satellites to support its militarization. Left millions with nothing but platitudes of a future better world. Not hard to follow and see that arguement and it has been tested and shown to be true. Much the same at present in N.Korea.
In essence, the Soviet Union and communism was always, "sacrifice" for the future. A perpetual never to arrive future. This was and will always be why communism is and was a dangerous pie in the sky philosophy. Much affinity to some forms of religion which are temporal, meaning we must suffer in this world to make it to a better land. The Soviets kept promising a bright future, it never arrived. The lie eventually was exposed for the sham it had always been. Unfortunately millions died and suffered in the process.
I can refer you to some good books on both the Gulagization of the U.S.S.R. and the abject poverty of much of the region outside of some parts of mother Russia.
Presently, Russia isn't able to create a pool of enforced labour and must at a miminum look after its people. This dramatically alters how much they might apply to a military budget. The control through fear and death that the Soviet Union was able to apply, allowed them to live well beyond their means and be the power they were. It could only last so long and was much like Germany at the end of WWII. This model can't last.
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
