Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Yay surge!
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Well?

Osama who? 9/11 what? Taliba-wha?

18%

[ 2 ]

We made this mess, and we're damned well going to stay there until we fix it

27%

[ 3 ]

The war of terrror is working! Things are terrifyingly bad

36%

[ 4 ]

I'll be honest: I don't care about this war outside of championing my political leanings.

18%

[ 2 ]

Total Votes : 11

Author

Message

thepeel

Joined: 08 Aug 2004

Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:11 pm Post subject:

Rabid anti-Americanism has all the familiar symptoms of a religion. The USA is an essentialised other, for people like DV. Not a country of 300 million. The "country" is guilty or evil or whatever. It is quite amazing.

Dome Vans
Guest

Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:15 pm Post subject:

Quote:

As Bush proceeds with his second term, we have had some six years to observe him. It is abundantly clear that he is a mental lightweight with a strong right-wing authoritarian personality, with some social dominance tendencies as well. Bush�s leading authorities are �his gut,� his God, and his vice president. Cheney, it appears, knows how to manipulate the president like a puppet, and handles his oversized ego by making him believe ideas or decisions are his own when, in fact, they are Cheney�s. While Bush does not appear to be a Double High, the vice president is a classic Double High, including - among other things - by his �go fukk yourself� dismissal of those with whom he disagrees. Cheney is the mind of this presidency, with Bush as the salesman. Bush simply does not have the mental facility or inclination for serious critical analysis of the policies he is being pushed to adopt.

Conservatives Without Conscience: Chapter 4 September 1, 2006. John W Dean,

It all becomes very apparent where the majority of you lot, McGarrett, Kuros, Mosley, BJWD etc get your oh so sophisticated attitude from. Couldn't have picked a better role model.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:46 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

Actually the Soviet Union was quite resilient . It was pretty strong . Were it not for falling oil prices and US pressure it would have still been around.

At any rate the Soviet Union was out to destory the US and if the US had not remaind vigilant they would have .

Anyway I see how you complain about the Vietnam war but you have a job cause of another similiar conflict. The Korean war. Ever thought about a job up North?

What was the difference between the Vietnam war and the Korean war anyway?

US pressure? The Soviet union collapsed onto itself. US economic pressure maybe but nothing comparable to the current situation in the middle east. The best cold war comparison to the current war is the Vietnam war and that was a failure.

I had a job in Ireland also. I don't think me having a job is a reason for America to go to war. It would be cool though.

Point being that the cold war points to the best way to fight defective systems, leave them alone and let them defeat themselves. Keep an eye on them sure, but invading=bad idea.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject:

Pligganease wrote:

JMO wrote:

Give up your war, you damn arabs...

That's a racist thing to say. You should be ashamed.

I'm hanging my head as I type.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:10 pm Post subject:

Twig wrote:

Who should I believe?

Presupposes that you might actually believe anything or anyone that fails to reaffirm your cynical, antiAmerican worldview. That is, I do not interpret this as an honest question; you are sneering, as usual. In any case, you might believe this CNN dispatch on "the surge..."

Quote:

President [W.] Bush will announce this week plans to cut U.S. troops in Iraq by about 30,000 -- to pre-'surge' levels -- by next summer, a senior administration official confirms to CNN.

Dome Vans wrote:

America has always been devoid of planning...

You cannot have your cake and eat it, too, Dome Vans. Has America planned and perpetrated world domination or not? However you may choose to answer this, I would like you to account for America's moves in the Spanish-American War and then the Canal's establishment; FDR's New Deal and long-range postwar planning including rewriting and reorienting international finance and world politics via the UN, World Bank, and IMF, for example; Truman's Fair Deal, the Marshall Plan, NATO, "Containment," and the Rio Treaty; Eisenhower's New Look, the Caracas Resolution, and the Inter-American Development Bank; JFK's New Frontier and Alliance-for-Progress, including the Peace Corps...the list goes on. And we are (mostly) only dealing with postwar American history here.

Well?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:54 am Post subject:

[quote="JMO"][

Quote:

Well if the US didn't spend on its military then the Soviets would have attacked . It was also the Soviet goal to sponger revolutions to isolate the US The arms race didn't wear them down.

So did falling oil prices in the 80's. You see after oil prices went high in the 80s the Soviets got used to them and counted on the revenue and when they fell the Soviets could not make up the revenue. Having to compete with the US in the arms race pushed them over the edge.

They even thought about first striking the US with nuclear weapons as the Soviet Union deployed 308 SS-18 for the purpose of being able to destroy US ICBMS.

While the US put its money into SLBMS the Soviets put their money into huge ICBMS .

For most of the cold war the US didn't have enough power to destroy all hardened land targets in the Soviet Union but the Soviets went for the abillty to destroy US hard targets .

Both sides could have destroyed cities but the only mission for heavy multiple war head ICBMS was to destroy other ICBMS.

Quote:

I had a job in Ireland also. I don't think me having a job is a reason for America to go to war. It would be cool though.

No but you would not have the job you did . You denounce the Vietnam war but for some reason the Korea war was ok with you.

Quote:

Point being that the cold war points to the best way to fight defective systems, leave them alone and let them defeat themselves. Keep an eye on them sure, but invading=bad idea.

IF the US didn't spend on its military and confront the Soviets and block their revolutions then they would have gone after the US.

That all sounds great about leaving them alone except the Bathists , the khomeni followers and the Al Qaedists will go after the US unless the US does what they demand.

So what ought the US do?

By the way in your opinion was the US also wrong to kick Saddam out of Kuwait in 1991?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:56 am Post subject:

Dome Vans wrote:

Quote:

and they will give up the war cause the US can hit them harder than they can hit the US.

They don't need to hit you. They can just imply that they will attack you, that seems to be enough to scare the s*it out of you. Also good excuse to pull in a few more of those civil liberties. Works out quite well for the government that.

They did hit the US. Why do you care so much about the Patriot act when you live in South Korea who has a national security law that is much tougher? You protest too much.

Even with the Patriot act the US is one of the most free and tolerant nations in the world .

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:50 am Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

So where is the invasion...seems like economic pressure brought about the end of the soviet union. also seems like the whole sponsor revolution thing works both ways.

Capitalism could deal with the changed oil prices which is why it is not a failded system.

Quote:

No but you would not have the job you did . You denounce the Vietnam war but for some reason the Korea war was ok with you.

By this logic, the english imvasion of ireland is also ok with me becasue without it i wouldn't have my job.

Really that is a ridiculous argument, my current employment situation does not justify past wars. i am not the centre of the universe.

Quote:

IF the US didn't spend on its military and confront the Soviets and block their revolutions then they would have gone after the US

proof please..seems like u did the same as them

Quote:

That all sounds great about leaving them alone except the Bathists , the khomeni followers and the Al Qaedists will go after the US unless the US does what they demand

oh please..there was like one attack on us soil.

Quote:

So what ought the US do?

learn from the past

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 7:11 am Post subject:

"JMO"]

Quote:

So where is the invasion...seems like economic pressure brought about the end of the soviet union. also seems like the whole sponsor revolution thing works both ways.

Military pressure too.

Keeping the US armed and chalenging the Soviet Unions revolutions.

You think the US spending more than a trillion dollars on the miltary was just economic pressure?

And of course if Communism just fails on its own then why is North Korea still around?

What do you mean the sponser revolution works both ways.

At any rate there was no moral equavalance by the US and the USSR

Quote:

Capitalism could deal with the changed oil prices which is why it is not a failded system.

Quote:

By this logic, the english imvasion of ireland is also ok with me becasue without it i wouldn't have my job.

No but your think the Veitnam war was morally wrong then you must think the same about the Korea. If not why?

Quote:

Really that is a ridiculous argument, my current employment situation does not justify past wars. i am not the centre of the universe.

Korean war wrong? Why is Vietam war wrong and the Korean war ok?

Quote:

IF the US didn't spend on its military and confront the Soviets and block their revolutions then they would have gone after the US

Quote:

proof please..seems like u did the same as them

Proof : the Korean war . Taking control of East Europe, Breshnev Stalin

SS-18's

And the US didn't do the same to them in victory .

and of course there is no moral equivalence between the US and the Soviet Empire.

Quote:

That all sounds great about leaving them alone except the Bathists , the khomeni followers and the Al Qaedists will go after the US unless the US does what they demand

Quote:

oh please..there was like one attack on us soil.

Only one?

You sure?

1993 World Trade Center bombing

The attack on the CIA

There were other attempted attacks and other small attacks where it is not clear if there was any foreign help.

And that was enough.

and of course there was attacks on US targets overseas

And there have been attacks against the US by Iran and Hizzbollah

And please was the US wrong to force Saddam from Kuwait? I'd like to know.

Quote:

learn from the past

OK WW II and the Cold war. The US confronted the totalitarian killers and won.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 1:28 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Military pressure too.

Keeping the US armed and chalenging the Soviet Unions revolutions.

Direct military intervention tended to fail in the Caold War. That be the point.

Quote:

You think the US spending more than a trillion dollars on the miltary was just economic pressure?

And of course if Communism just fails on its own then why is North Korea still around?

Im sure the american economy is worth more than a trillion dollars over that same time scale. People are by nature capitalistic.

N Korea has failed. It is unsustainable and will fail. Just like Cuba, China, Russia etc.

Quote:

What do you mean the sponser revolution works both ways.

America did it too.

Quote:

At any rate there was no moral equavalance by the US and the USSR

You attempt to make a moral argument when there is none. I said communist russia collapsed under economic pressure primarily, there is no moral issue.

Quote:

No but your think the Veitnam war

when did i say this...

Quote:

must think the same about the Korea. If not why?

see abpve..morals have nothing to do with it..just appreciation of strategy that works.

Quote:

Korean war wrong? Why is Vietam war wrong and the Korean war ok?

you seem to think like a child.

Quote:

Proof : the Korean war . Taking control of East Europe, Breshnev Stalin

Where did they go after the US. eastern eruope is not east coast USA.

Quote:

Only one?

You sure?

1993 World Trade Center bombing

The attack on the CIA

3...how many terrorist attacks have there been in iraq like this week...seems like not alot of provocation is needed to invade a country that had nothing to do with said 3 attacks..

Quote:

And please was the US wrong to force Saddam from Kuwait?

what relevance to this argument..

Quote:

OK WW II and the Cold war. The US confronted the totalitarian killers and won.

WWii=massively different situation

Cold War was won by military vigilance yes, but mainly economic pressure. The closest example in recent history was the Vietnam War which as we know was a bad situation.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:48 pm Post subject:

[quote="JMO"][

Quote:

Direct military intervention tended to fail in the Caold War. That be the point.

Saved South Korea. And miltiary power protected the US and its allies

[

Quote:

Im sure the american economy is worth more than a trillion dollars over that same time scale. People are by nature capitalistic.

Yes but w/o US military spending the Soviet Union would have attacked.

Quote:

N Korea has failed. It is unsustainable and will fail. Just like Cuba, China, Russia etc.

Yes but w/o US military power they would have conquered South Korea long ago. And it is still around.

Quote:

America did it too.

IT was part of pushing back by the US.

Quote:

At any rate there was no moral equavalance by the US and the USSR

Quote:

You attempt to make a moral argument when there is none. I said communist russia collapsed under economic pressure primarily, there is no moral issue.

You seem to complain about the US sponsoring revolutions, it was needed as part of the pressure
..

Quote:

see abpve..morals have nothing to do with it..just appreciation of strategy that works.

So in your book Korea was ok cause it worked but Vietnam didn't so it wasn't.

Thanks you like the NFL then you must know the term Monday Morning Quarterback.

Quote:

you seem to think like a child.

Quote:

Where did they go after the US. eastern eruope is not east coast USA.

It was closer and easier If the US didn't have the military power Russia would have attacked. For the record the Russians wanted West Europe too.

See the Berlin blockcade and the the huge troop buildup focued at West Europe. It wasn't cause the Soviets were peaceful.

and there was the Korean war and SS-18s. What was all that about?

[

Quote:

3...how many terrorist attacks have there been in iraq like this week...seems like not alot of provocation is needed to invade a country that had nothing to do with said 3 attacks..

9-11 was enough to show the mideast was a threat . Time to deal with it.

Saddam's was regime was already at war with the US and it was not legitimate anyway.

Quote:

what relevance to this argument..

I wanna know where you stand. Why not just answer?

Quote:

WWii=massively different situation

and some similarities Al Qaeda , the Bathists and the Khomeni followers are fascist bigots.

Quote:

Cold War was won by military vigilance yes, but mainly economic pressure. The closest example in recent history was the Vietnam War which as we know was a bad situation.

What was the ecnomic pressure really by the US - that is for my information.

JMO

Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:38 pm Post subject:

[quote="Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee"][quote="JMO"][

Quote:

Saved South Korea. And miltiary power protected the US and its allies

.

saving south korea is irrelevant. military power is different from military intervention.

The point is that the cold war showed that the best way to fight flawed systems such as communism/fanaticism is to sure remain miliarily vigiland and strength but to let them defeat themselves. They will come around to your way through economic pressure and diplomacy.

You invade and all you do is alienate all the people who would have moderated the country. Iran is a good case in point. Military pressure on Iran just makes the hardline in that country stronger. Countries should be given a chance to find their own way as outside intervention is more miss than hit.

Quote:

Yes but w/o US military power they would have conquered South Korea long ago. And it is still around.

And..how does this help america..this is american foreign policy not s korean.

Quote:

You seem to complain about the US sponsoring revolutions, it was needed as part of the pressure

Just pointing out the nature of the cold war, both sides meddled in other countries to their obvious detriment and sometimes benefit. Not a moral issue at all.

Quote:

So in your book Korea was ok cause it worked but Vietnam didn't so it wasn't.

Thanks you like the NFL then you must know the term Monday Morning Quarterback.

I didn't say the korean war was ok. NFL QBs watch film for a reason. When the QB gets sacked alot and throws picks he might say a made up reason to the press( we didn't show enough heart) but in the film room they find out the real reason(hes holding onto the ball too long, making bad coverage reads).

Point is you should learn from the past and try to apply what you have learned.

Quote:

9-11 was enough to show the mideast was a threat . Time to deal with it.

Saddam's was regime was already at war with the US and it was not legitimate anyway.

Putting Saddam and 9-11 in the same paragraph does not connect them.

Quote:

and some similarities Al Qaeda , the Bathists and the Khomeni followers are fascist bigots

please...lets not compare a massive conventional war with this..

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:52 pm Post subject:

[quote="JMO"][

Quote:

saving south korea is irrelevant. military power is different from military intervention.

Keeping the Soviets from getting more states under there control was part of the pressure

Quote:

The point is that the cold war showed that the best way to fight flawed systems such as communism/fanaticism is to sure remain miliarily vigiland and strength but to let them defeat themselves. They will come around to your way through economic pressure and diplomacy.

They don't defeat themselves unless you keep yourself safe from them. Which means military power a lot of it.

Quote:

You invade and all you do is alienate all the people who would have moderated the country. Iran is a good case in point. Military pressure on Iran just makes the hardline in that country stronger. Countries should be given a chance to find their own way as outside intervention is more miss than hit.

Iran and Iraq are very different. Saddam was an absolute totalitarian.

As for Iran the US ought to take a different approach and wait and see. At the same time it all requries the US deploy new weapons to make sure that Iran doesn't gain the benefits from nuclear weapons.

Quote:

And..how does this help america..this is american foreign policy not s korean.

Keeping the Soviets from getting to many nations under their control was part of the pressure. And it defended the US.

One Soviet Strategy was to surround the US w/ enemies.

Quote:

Just pointing out the nature of the cold war, both sides meddled in other countries to their obvious detriment and sometimes benefit. Not a moral issue at all.

We can't know when it worked and when it didn't.

[quote]So in your book Korea was ok cause it worked but Vietnam didn't

Quote:

Who would not agree , on the other hand AQ has charateristics in common with some of the worst enemies the US has faced.

Quote:

Putting Saddam and 9-11 in the same paragraph does not connect them

.

No but Iraq is in thecenter of the mideast.

And there was a war with Iraq going on before 9-11.

Quote:

please...lets not compare a massive conventional war with this..

Lets just talk about the nature of the group.

And in the case of Saddam he was much more reckless than any Soviet leader.

He continued to threaten Kuwait even after the first gulf war. It was clear that were he not contained that he would continue to do what he did before the first gulf war.

So Saddam needed to be contained but the US could not contain Saddam and pressure Saudi Arabia on terror at the same time.

twg

Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:42 pm Post subject:

Putting aside your utter hypocrisy for a second...

BJWD wrote:

Rabid anti-Americanism has all the familiar symptoms of a religion. The USA is an essentialised other, for people like DV. Not a country of 300 million. The "country" is guilty or evil or whatever. It is quite amazing.

That's funny. I'd place the "Defenders Of The Faith" mantle on guys like you, Joo, Gopher, Pligganese, and Steve-O long before I'd put it on anyone else here.

Look at the attacks that you guys continuously launch against anyone you deem to be heretics. Hell, it's often not even in response to anything said. People who don't share your world views simply existing is enough reason for you all to start a million threads that are little more than you evangelizing your politics and demonizing others that don't share them.

For example.

Gopher wrote:

Twig wrote:

Who should I believe?

Presupposes that you might actually believe anything or anyone that fails to reaffirm your cynical, antiAmerican worldview.

Note that the great debater failed to live up to his self-image and acted like a frothing at the mouth evangelical. His politics weren't attacked by me, nor was he personally.

Yet he launched into the personal attacks immediately. As does Joo, Steve, Pligganese, and the other Neo-Con Evangelists with every post they make.

You guys always launch these personal attacks immediately against people who haven't done the same to you. The above is just another example of why the Current Events Forum is a pathetic joke: The same handful of users, pretending to be intelligent discussionists but are really little different from Osama Bin Ladin in their obsessiveness, hate of others and unwillingness to question their own views.

Sneering, Gopher?

More like: Constantly recoiling in disgust at you and your ilk's wild-eyed demagoguery.

Pligganease

Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 6:56 pm Post subject:

twg wrote:

You guys always launch these personal attacks immediately against people who haven't done the same to you.

Show hypocrisy much? Jeeezus... You can't make a post without insulting someone. It's easy for you, I guess, to just label everyone that disagrees with you a "neo-con" or a "right-winger," untrue and baseless as it is.

Don't get me wrong, we all appreciate what you add to the discussions. Wait... You don't add anything to the discussions! You just pop in and throw a "You're a neo-con!" or "George Bush is evil!" and try to appear funny or witty.

You fail, by the way.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 3 of 5

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

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe