|
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 |
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 2:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country?
|
Canada is a non nuclear country in terms of military weapons. Canada does not possess nukes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Not strategically important in the Korean War? Are you out of your mind?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. |
Do you know the difference between the words "important" and "decisive"?
You seem to think I am somehow saying Canada did nothing in the war. I am only taking issue with your assertion that but for Canada being involved, the Korean War would have had a significantly different result. You claimed that we wouldn't be here in Korea if not for Canada. That is a massive claim that I'm not convinced is born out by the facts.
| Quote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country? Only if you forget the history of the atom bomb, the Cold War, NORAD, and NATO.
Just have a read. It's getting too late for me to bother. |
Please show me the nuclear arms that Canada possesses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radcon wrote: |
| 12ax7 wrote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country?
|
Canada is a non nuclear country in terms of military weapons. Canada does not possess nukes. |
Canada only admitted to possession nuclear weapons until 1984 when a reporter found documents stating that there were indeed nuclear weapons in Canada until that year (and Canada was supposedly a non-nuclear/anti-nuclear country since the '60s). When pressed with the question of whether Canada was still in possession of nuclear weapons, the government would only say that Canada is not in possession of current nuclear weapons, which could be interpreted as an admission that Canada possesses older weapons. You'd have to be naive to think that Canada doesn't have such weapons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
Not strategically important in the Korean War? Are you out of your mind?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. |
Do you know the difference between the words "important" and "decisive"?
You seem to think I am somehow saying Canada did nothing in the war. I am only taking issue with your assertion that but for Canada being involved, the Korean War would have had a significantly different result. You claimed that we wouldn't be here in Korea if not for Canada. That is a massive claim that I'm not convinced is born out by the facts.
| Quote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country? Only if you forget the history of the atom bomb, the Cold War, NORAD, and NATO.
Just have a read. It's getting too late for me to bother. |
Please show me the nuclear arms that Canada possesses. |
Read up on the two battles I mentioned, particularly the Battle of Gapyeong (Kapyong). Had Kapyong fallen, Seoul would have been taken by the Chinese and the First Chinese Spring Offensive would have been a success. As a result, they essentially prevented a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula. Like I said, it's an historical fact. Deny it all you want, it only makes you sound ignorant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| radcon wrote: |
| 12ax7 wrote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country?
|
Canada is a non nuclear country in terms of military weapons. Canada does not possess nukes. |
Canada only admitted to possession nuclear weapons until 1984 when a reporter found documents stating that there were indeed nuclear weapons in Canada until that year (and Canada was supposedly a non-nuclear/anti-nuclear country since the '60s). When pressed with the question of whether Canada was still in possession of nuclear weapons, the government would only say that Canada is not in possession of current nuclear weapons, which could be interpreted as an admission that Canada possesses older weapons. You'd have to be naive to think that Canada doesn't have such weapons. |
Define possession. Prior to 1984 all the nukes in Canada were under US command. Why would such a fair, progressive, and enlightened government lie to its own people about nukes on its territory?
Every source states that the US removed its nukes from Canada in 1984. But you seem to have some top secret intel that the rest of the world isn't privy to. Please share. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
Not strategically important in the Korean War? Are you out of your mind?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. |
Do you know the difference between the words "important" and "decisive"?
You seem to think I am somehow saying Canada did nothing in the war. I am only taking issue with your assertion that but for Canada being involved, the Korean War would have had a significantly different result. You claimed that we wouldn't be here in Korea if not for Canada. That is a massive claim that I'm not convinced is born out by the facts.
| Quote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country? Only if you forget the history of the atom bomb, the Cold War, NORAD, and NATO.
Just have a read. It's getting too late for me to bother. |
Please show me the nuclear arms that Canada possesses. |
Read up on the two battles I mentioned, particularly the Battle of Gapyeong (Kapyong). Had Kapyong fallen, Seoul would have been taken by the Chinese and the First Chinese Spring Offensive would have been a success. As a result, they essentially prevented a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula. Like I said, it's an historical fact. Deny it all you want, it only makes you sound ignorant. |
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radcon wrote: |
[
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
Maybe not 100% but this seems close enough
| Quote: |
U.S.THREATENS ATOMIC WARFARE
On Nov. 5 1950, the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued orders for the retaliatory atomic bombing of Manchurian military bases, if either their armies crossed into Korea or if PRC or KPA bombers attacked Korea from there. The President ordered the transfer of nine Mark-4 nuclear capsules "to the Air Force's Ninth Bomb Group, the designated carrier of the weapons, and signed an order to use them against Chinese and Korean targets.
On Nov. 30, 1950, the USAF Strategic Air Command was ordered to "augment it's capacities, and this should include atomic capabilities.
President Truman remarked that his government was actively considering using the atomic bomb to end the war in Korea but that only he commanded atomic bomb use.
In 1951 the U.S. escalated closest to atomic warfare in Korea. Because the PRC had deployed new armies to the Korean frontier, pit crews at the Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, assembled atomic bombs for Korean warfare, lacking only the essential nuclear cores. In Oct. 1951, the U.S. effected Operation Hudson Harbor to establish nuclear weapons capability. USAF B-29 bombers practiced individual bombing runs (using dummy nuclear or conventional bombs) from Okinawa to North Korea, coordinated from Yokota AFB in Japan. Hudson Harbor tested "actual functioning of all activities which would be involved in an atomic strike, including weapons assembly and testing, leading to ground control of bomb aiming". There were an increasing number of suggestions on precisely how the atomic bombing of N. Korea would be conducted. Robert Oppenheimer, director of "the Manhatten Project", was designated a consultant in the tactical use of the A-bomb.
With atomic weapons already on Okinawa, the stage was set to proceed with the actual detonation of numerous nuclear bombs. It was suggested that General Curtis LeMay be put in charge of the actual drops. All ranking officials plus The President of the U.S. agreed to the plan. Everything was ready, just waiting for the "word". |
(bolding mine)
So everything was ready for the word "Go"...it wasn't just a contingency plan at this point.
http://b-29s-over-korea.com/NorthKorea-A-Bomb/US-Planned-To-A-Bomb-N-Korea-In-1950-War_02.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| radcon wrote: |
[
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
Maybe not 100% but this seems close enough
| Quote: |
U.S.THREATENS ATOMIC WARFARE
On Nov. 5 1950, the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued orders for the retaliatory atomic bombing of Manchurian military bases, if either their armies crossed into Korea or if PRC or KPA bombers attacked Korea from there. The President ordered the transfer of nine Mark-4 nuclear capsules "to the Air Force's Ninth Bomb Group, the designated carrier of the weapons, and signed an order to use them against Chinese and Korean targets.
On Nov. 30, 1950, the USAF Strategic Air Command was ordered to "augment it's capacities, and this should include atomic capabilities.
President Truman remarked that his government was actively considering using the atomic bomb to end the war in Korea but that only he commanded atomic bomb use.
In 1951 the U.S. escalated closest to atomic warfare in Korea. Because the PRC had deployed new armies to the Korean frontier, pit crews at the Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, assembled atomic bombs for Korean warfare, lacking only the essential nuclear cores. In Oct. 1951, the U.S. effected Operation Hudson Harbor to establish nuclear weapons capability. USAF B-29 bombers practiced individual bombing runs (using dummy nuclear or conventional bombs) from Okinawa to North Korea, coordinated from Yokota AFB in Japan. Hudson Harbor tested "actual functioning of all activities which would be involved in an atomic strike, including weapons assembly and testing, leading to ground control of bomb aiming". There were an increasing number of suggestions on precisely how the atomic bombing of N. Korea would be conducted. Robert Oppenheimer, director of "the Manhatten Project", was designated a consultant in the tactical use of the A-bomb.
With atomic weapons already on Okinawa, the stage was set to proceed with the actual detonation of numerous nuclear bombs. It was suggested that General Curtis LeMay be put in charge of the actual drops. All ranking officials plus The President of the U.S. agreed to the plan. Everything was ready, just waiting for the "word". |
(bolding mine)
So everything was ready for the word "Go"...it wasn't just a contingency plan at this point.
http://b-29s-over-korea.com/NorthKorea-A-Bomb/US-Planned-To-A-Bomb-N-Korea-In-1950-War_02.html |
And you can say that the reason the US didn't use nukes is because of the valiant effort of Canadian forces at the Battle of Kapyong? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radcon wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| radcon wrote: |
[
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
Maybe not 100% but this seems close enough
| Quote: |
U.S.THREATENS ATOMIC WARFARE
On Nov. 5 1950, the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued orders for the retaliatory atomic bombing of Manchurian military bases, if either their armies crossed into Korea or if PRC or KPA bombers attacked Korea from there. The President ordered the transfer of nine Mark-4 nuclear capsules "to the Air Force's Ninth Bomb Group, the designated carrier of the weapons, and signed an order to use them against Chinese and Korean targets.
On Nov. 30, 1950, the USAF Strategic Air Command was ordered to "augment it's capacities, and this should include atomic capabilities.
President Truman remarked that his government was actively considering using the atomic bomb to end the war in Korea but that only he commanded atomic bomb use.
In 1951 the U.S. escalated closest to atomic warfare in Korea. Because the PRC had deployed new armies to the Korean frontier, pit crews at the Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, assembled atomic bombs for Korean warfare, lacking only the essential nuclear cores. In Oct. 1951, the U.S. effected Operation Hudson Harbor to establish nuclear weapons capability. USAF B-29 bombers practiced individual bombing runs (using dummy nuclear or conventional bombs) from Okinawa to North Korea, coordinated from Yokota AFB in Japan. Hudson Harbor tested "actual functioning of all activities which would be involved in an atomic strike, including weapons assembly and testing, leading to ground control of bomb aiming". There were an increasing number of suggestions on precisely how the atomic bombing of N. Korea would be conducted. Robert Oppenheimer, director of "the Manhatten Project", was designated a consultant in the tactical use of the A-bomb.
With atomic weapons already on Okinawa, the stage was set to proceed with the actual detonation of numerous nuclear bombs. It was suggested that General Curtis LeMay be put in charge of the actual drops. All ranking officials plus The President of the U.S. agreed to the plan. Everything was ready, just waiting for the "word". |
(bolding mine)
So everything was ready for the word "Go"...it wasn't just a contingency plan at this point.
http://b-29s-over-korea.com/NorthKorea-A-Bomb/US-Planned-To-A-Bomb-N-Korea-In-1950-War_02.html |
And you can say that the reason the US didn't use nukes is because of the valiant effort of Canadian forces at the Battle of Kapyong? |
You didn't make that qualification in your last post...which is why I didn't either. I just answered the question you posed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 02, 2013 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dude, I'm not saying the Canadians didn't play a major role in the battles they participated in.
I'm saying that claiming "We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Canadian forces" is rather hard to prove and verify.
And one might as well say that "We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for American/British/Australian/Turkish/South Korean forces".
That's like someone from Maine saying "If it wasn't for soldiers from Maine, the South would have won the Civil War. Maine soldiers played a crucial role at Gettysburg, a crucial battle. If the North had lost the battle X, Y, Z would have happened". I'm not saying Maine soldiers suck, I'm just saying that saying America is a united country today because of soldiers from Maine is a bit of a stretch and a huge guessing game. Same with Canada.
Aside from one idiot, no one is denigrating Canada's armed forces.
| Quote: |
| Canada only admitted to possession nuclear weapons until 1984 when a reporter found documents stating that there were indeed nuclear weapons in Canada until that year (and Canada was supposedly a non-nuclear/anti-nuclear country since the '60s). When pressed with the question of whether Canada was still in possession of nuclear weapons, the government would only say that Canada is not in possession of current nuclear weapons, which could be interpreted as an admission that Canada possesses older weapons. You'd have to be naive to think that Canada doesn't have such weapons. |
Those weapons were all under US military control. Built in America, designed by the finest Nazi minds in the country (I joke).
| Quote: |
| Uh... you have listed quite a number of 'untested' units here. Spain, Italy, Germany, Japan, Taiwan haven't been battle-tested within living memory. With France, only the Foreign legion is battle-tested. Units that pass parade don't usually pass combat and vice-versa. |
So that means their militaries are incompetant and would fold? That their equipment is useless? That their training would just get them blown up? Come on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| More bad commonwealth education showing. Seoul fell once before and no nukes were used. At Kapyong, Australians did most of the fighting before being relieved by the Canadians , the Aussies bore the brunt of the attack. Elsewhere 600,000 Chinese and North Korean troops smad at the American held sector of the line. Kaypong was a sideshow compared to this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radcon wrote: |
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
Not strategically important in the Korean War? Are you out of your mind?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. |
Do you know the difference between the words "important" and "decisive"?
You seem to think I am somehow saying Canada did nothing in the war. I am only taking issue with your assertion that but for Canada being involved, the Korean War would have had a significantly different result. You claimed that we wouldn't be here in Korea if not for Canada. That is a massive claim that I'm not convinced is born out by the facts.
| Quote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country? Only if you forget the history of the atom bomb, the Cold War, NORAD, and NATO.
Just have a read. It's getting too late for me to bother. |
Please show me the nuclear arms that Canada possesses. |
Read up on the two battles I mentioned, particularly the Battle of Gapyeong (Kapyong). Had Kapyong fallen, Seoul would have been taken by the Chinese and the First Chinese Spring Offensive would have been a success. As a result, they essentially prevented a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula. Like I said, it's an historical fact. Deny it all you want, it only makes you sound ignorant. |
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
You almost make it sound as if Harry Truman was 100% opposed to the use of nuclear bombs in the Korean War.
He most certainly considered it, and so did other American politicians.
Al Gore Sr. proposed to the US Congress in April of 1951 that "something cataclysmic" should be done to end the Korean War just a few short days before the two battles I mention.
A few weeks earlier, in March, when a large movement of Chinese soldiers was noticed, the atomic bomb loading pits at Kadena Air Base in Japan were rendered operational, with the bombs assembled, lacking only the nuclear core.
They again considered using nuclear weapons in June of 1951. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| radcon wrote: |
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
Not strategically important in the Korean War? Are you out of your mind?
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. |
Do you know the difference between the words "important" and "decisive"?
You seem to think I am somehow saying Canada did nothing in the war. I am only taking issue with your assertion that but for Canada being involved, the Korean War would have had a significantly different result. You claimed that we wouldn't be here in Korea if not for Canada. That is a massive claim that I'm not convinced is born out by the facts.
| Quote: |
And, really, are you sure that Canada is a non-nuclear country? Only if you forget the history of the atom bomb, the Cold War, NORAD, and NATO.
Just have a read. It's getting too late for me to bother. |
Please show me the nuclear arms that Canada possesses. |
Read up on the two battles I mentioned, particularly the Battle of Gapyeong (Kapyong). Had Kapyong fallen, Seoul would have been taken by the Chinese and the First Chinese Spring Offensive would have been a success. As a result, they essentially prevented a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula. Like I said, it's an historical fact. Deny it all you want, it only makes you sound ignorant. |
And you know for 100% certainty sitting at your computer in 2013, that Harry Truman would have nuked the Korean Peninsula? Wow. I think you missed your true calling. |
You almost make it sound as if Harry Truman was 100% opposed to the use of nuclear bombs in the Korean War.
He most certainly considered it, and so did other American politicians.
Al Gore Sr. proposed to the US Congress in April of 1951 that "something cataclysmic" should be done to end the Korean War just a few short days before the two battles I mention.
A few weeks earlier, in March, when a large movement of Chinese soldiers was noticed, the atomic bomb loading pits at Kadena Air Base in Japan were rendered operational, with the bombs assembled, lacking only the nuclear core.
They again considered using nuclear weapons in June of 1951. |
I never said nor implied that Truman was unwilling to use nukes. I was only refuting your post that said if not for the Canadians at Kapyong, the use of nukes was a done deal. No way to know that either way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
And one might as well say that "We wouldn't be here if it wasn't for American/British/Australian/Turkish/South Korean forces". |
South Korea wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Truman, MacArthur, Incheon, American supplies coming into Pusan and Americans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
American combat deaths in the Korean War: 33,686
Canadian combat deaths in the Korean War: 312
For every Canadian soldier killed, more than 100 American soldiers were killed (which makes sense, as the U.S. sent about one hundred times as many troops). So, no, it is not because of Canada South Korea is a free country. |
|
| 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
