North Versus South Korea

[Atilla]

This is really "much to do about nothing"

North Korea is an a process of a leadership transition

I think that their recent actions are mainly aimed for North Korean domestic consumption, rather than any serious intentions towards the South.

You are assuming NK fired first.

Not denying but I don't believe any evidence has been shown either way.

 

[Hilarymannah]

None of them,....

The only "real" causes for dying are usually disease, suicide or accident (suicide including the "act" of war)
The rest are debatable (ideologies)

 

[spreader_legger]

I'd be interested to know your opinion about Ratzinger's views.

He stated that all these ideologies stem from end of 19th century atheistic philosphies & the willingness of the elite to reduce the powers and influences of the church throughout society

Love it or hate it, religion does provide a moral compass for humanity to follow.
OK ... so you get peodophile priests etc.etc but the problem of ditching religion out of the window in favour of secularism leads to moral relativism, Nazism, Communism and so forth.

As to your question about freedom .... well I'd say no-one is truly free. You are a product of the society you live in & the inevitable social engineering that you have been subjected to.

Beg to differ.

Freedom is not a social control strategy. I guess it depends how you interpret your freedom.

Just because some somebody has written some articles observing war - doesn't make it so. Indulge your self with considered thought and reflection.

So what or which one of these causes would you defend as a cause dying for?

 

[Atilla]

War sets nations back decades?

Not necessarily .... If you follow Schumpeter's theory of creative destrcution

By destroying old industries, countries are forced to create new ones .... with all the up to date gizmos etc. Just look at Japan & Germany post Second World War

Isn't this a consideration with the benefit of hind-sight. No one goes to war for these reasons. R&D investment can be used for public goods and service consumption but is not the driving factor for war.

Ironically, it was the British that lost out ... but perhaps that was a combination of factors? Mass nationalisation, being lumbered with huge post war debts etc.

I agree - the British lost the first and the second world war pretending to maintain power base which was drifting away. I believe if you have to resort to war you have lost already. Diplomacy always a preferred course to ones advantage.

Your suggetion that we should let waring battle it out, reminds me a bit of the inter-war attitudes that led to the rise of Adolf. Indeed, a lot of what we're seeing today reminds me of that era ... competitive devaluations, economic slowdown/defaltionary environment etc. etc. I guess everything moves in waves & history has an unfortunate way of repeating itself

I beg to differ - eventually the Russians and the Turks would have made mince meat out of Adolf. He was a madman who became a bigger madman then he could manage himself. The Russians and the Turks would have seen to him sooner or later. I doubt he could contain France, Spain, Italy, Portugal or Greece even if he did take those countries over.

I see it as a missed opportunity for Britain who acted too hastilly instead of buying time. Typical over reaction of great powers who lose it and think and believe they still have it.


Just watching Battle of Waterloo on telly. Awful stuff...

 

[Atilla]

None of them,....

The only "real" causes for dying are usually disease, suicide or accident (suicide including the "act" of war)
The rest are debatable (ideologies)

I meant as a just cause for going to war. Not cause of dying...

You know from that list. Didn't the US fight the cold war based on ideology. What was the Vietnam war about. Or the Latin American geurillas fighting for social justice. Now it is simply a bit of daft religion.

What would you be willing to take up arms for?

 

[Splitlink]

I beg to differ - eventually the Russians and the Turks would have made mince meat out of Adolf. He was a madman who became a bigger madman then he could manage himself. The Russians and the Turks would have seen to him sooner or later. I doubt he could contain France, Spain, Italy, Portugal or Greece even if he did take those countries over.

I see it as a missed opportunity for Britain who acted too hastilly instead of buying time. Typical over reaction of great powers who lose it and think and believe they still have it.


Just watching Battle of Waterloo on telly. Awful stuff...

I'm not sure about that because of the technological advantage Germany had over those countries. Like it, or not, Atilla, the US cooked Adolf's goose. I do agree that Adolph took on a handfull when he started on the Russians and their winter. If he had left them alone we might be living in a different way, to-day.

This is one of the things that we will never know.

 

[Atilla]

I'd be interested to know your opinion about Ratzinger's views.

He stated that all these ideologies stem from end of 19th century atheistic philosphies & the willingness of the elite to reduce the powers and influences of the church throughout society

Love it or hate it, religion does provide a moral compass for humanity to follow.
OK ... so you get peodophile priests etc.etc but the problem of ditching religion out of the window in favour of secularism leads to moral relativism, Nazism, Communism and so forth.

As to your question about freedom .... well I'd say no-one is truly free. You are a product of the society you live in & the inevitable social engineering that you have been subjected to.

Not familiar with his work or writings but relations between religious leaders and kings through out history were hand in hand and very much strained and constant strugle. I am glad we have secular rule of law where stupid religion plays no part.

As for freedom - I'm not sure I could say the things I do on these boards if I were in good many other countries.

If I have the financial means I can pretty much do what ever I choose. First I have to earn that entitlement.

I could stand up on my soap box in Hyde Park Corner and speak till the cows come home.


This nonsense about banks trying to control us with debt and so on is a load of rubbish. That ODDT's video was absolute tosh. Guy sits on a chair in front of a fireplace and tells us Plasma screens and gizmos are created to enslave us. It was at that point I realised it is all a load of ********.

As often is the case because some fruitcake says something that suits our arguement he defends a daft position.

imho he is no different to a white racist except he is black. Prejudice lives in us all. Difficult to identify who we really are. We are certainly not the ego as that is just a thief in us all that steals our true purpose in life imho.

Enough said I think. I trangress.

 

[Atilla]

I'm not sure about that because of the technological advantage Germany had over those countries. Like it, or not, Atilla, the US cooked Adolf's goose. I do agree that Adolph took on a handfull when he started on the Russians and their winter. If he had left them alone we might be living in a different way, to-day.

This is one of the things that we will never know.

It was clearly in his mega-manic nature that the more power and control he won the more fruity he would become.

Expansion without consolidation would have left him well exposed. Moreover, Russians and the Turks with long history would not have been a push over the Southern Europeans were...

My point would be that Britain would have supplied the Russians and the Turks with what ever technology they needed in exchange for gold or territory. Doubt we would have then let the yanks into the ME taking over all that oil.

I hope you note that US helping UK was in exchange for gold and colonies and the ME hand over. It wasn't goodwill and for free you know.

 

[spreader_legger]

Turkey was neutral during the Second World War

Whilst Stalin was begging for Western assistance since Hitler invaded Russia. I think you will find that they got huge assistance from the West.

I can see you're no military tactician. Allowing Hitler the chance to get his hands on Russian resources (not to mention all that additional slave labour) would have been detrimental to the war effort.

Nipping the problem in the bud ... i.e. when he first entered the demilitarised zone as underlined by the Versaille treaty would have saved millions of lives (not to mention cash)

You cannot always rely on peaceful solutions to your problems (look at Tibet for example) ... sometimes you need to fight fire with fire

I beg to differ - eventually the Russians and the Turks would have made mince meat out of Adolf. He was a madman who became a bigger madman then he could manage himself. The Russians and the Turks would have seen to him sooner or later. I doubt he could contain France, Spain, Italy, Portugal or Greece even if he did take those countries over.

I see it as a missed opportunity for Britain who acted too hastilly instead of buying time. Typical over reaction of great powers who lose it and think and believe they still have it.


Just watching Battle of Waterloo on telly. Awful stuff...

 

[Hilarymannah]

If everyone believed there was never a "just cause" to go to war, it wouldn't happen !
Who gave you, your beliefs ?

 

[spreader_legger]

I'm not sure you can say what you like .... especially if you have any position of "authority". You will then need to tow the line

As for the crap spouted on bulletin boards ... then sure you can say what you want. Most likely what you say will be lost in all the other noise & relegated to the dust bin of history

But do note that your opinions are themselves shaped by the society you live in.

As for Kings and Queens of yesteryear ... at least they were supposed to look after their own people. I don't think you could say the same things about the multinationals of today

P.S ODT is a fool

Not familiar with his work or writings but relations between religious leaders and kings through out history were hand in hand and very much strained and constant strugle. I am glad we have secular rule of law where stupid religion plays no part.

As for freedom - I'm not sure I could say the things I do on these boards if I were in good many other countries.

If I have the financial means I can pretty much do what ever I choose. First I have to earn that entitlement.

I could stand up on my soap box in Hyde Park Corner and speak till the cows come home.


This nonsense about banks trying to control us with debt and so on is a load of rubbish. That ODDT's video was absolute tosh. Guy sits on a chair in front of a fireplace and tells us Plasma screens and gizmos are created to enslave us. It was at that point I realised it is all a load of ********.

As often is the case because some fruitcake says something that suits our arguement he defends a daft position.

imho he is no different to a white racist except he is black. Prejudice lives in us all. Difficult to identify who we really are. We are certainly not the ego as that is just a thief in us all that steals our true purpose in life imho.

Enough said I think. I trangress.

 

[Atilla]

Turkey was neutral during the Second World War

Whilst Stalin was begging for Western assistance since Hitler invaded Russia. I think you will find that they got huge assistance from the West.

I can see you're no military tactician. Allowing Hitler the chance to get his hands on Russian resources (not to mention all that additional slave labour) would have been detrimental to the war effort.

Nipping the problem in the bud ... i.e. when he first entered the demilitarised zone as underlined by the Versaille treaty would have saved millions of lives (not to mention cash)

You cannot always rely on peaceful solutions to your problems (look at Tibet for example) ... sometimes you need to fight fire with fire

Yes I know Turkey was neutral and good for them it was too - and I am not a military tactician.

My whole point is that I would avoid war. People will come up with 1001 reasons for and why they conduct war but it boils down to a lot of BS.

Do you guys seriously think Hitler could have taken over the whole of Europe - Russia and the ME and Africa and the UK and maintained it? NO FREAKING WAY COULD HE? Maybe in the middle ages but not in 20th Century he couldn't. The guys was a nut for fs.

My point is people rush into war. However, if other people want to knock them selves out I'd let them.

I would not create war.

I would make allies with every country and open my borders.

Look at the trench wars and look at us now. Same goes for the French.

Wars a futile full stop.

Here is a big if and consideration.

Let us say South Korea (far bigger better and richer country - for aguements sake) opens borders with North Korea.

The ruling elite takes as it's new leader the NK son of the old dirt bag. Becomes China's begotten new son. Integrates with the great trading block.

Now China thinks hey we just united with Korea and this little **** in the North is a pain in our side. Let's sit down and talk as to how we can maximise our gains.

SK asks China for help the growing power instead of USA the dwindling bully of the region.

Hey presto - everyone is happy - give or take a few people in high office - citizens all gain, country gains no bullets fired and no deaths.

WIN WIN WIN...

Simple scenario that could be played out via diplomatic channels that would easily get rid of a tyrant and unite Korea to China.

 

[Atilla]

If everyone believed there was never a "just cause" to go to war, it wouldn't happen !
Who gave you, your beliefs ?

Parents - relatives - friends and most importantly books I've read along my education and experience in life.

Why are you not answering the question?

You are like a politician answering a question with another question... :cheesy:

 

[spreader_legger]

Except perhaps that it may be in somebody's interests for these tensions to continue!

(P.S. if you think citizens count for ****, you are more naive than I give you credit for )

Yes I know Turkey was neutral and good for them it was too - and I am not a military tactician.

My whole point is that I would avoid war. People will come up with 1001 reasons for and why they conduct war but it boils down to a lot of BS.

Do you guys seriously think Hitler could have taken over the whole of Europe - Russia and the ME and Africa and the UK and maintained it? NO FREAKING WAY COULD HE? Maybe in the middle ages but not in 20th Century he couldn't. The guys was a nut for fs.

My point is people rush into war. However, if other people want to knock them selves out I'd let them.

I would not create war.

I would make allies with every country and open my borders.

Look at the trench wars and look at us now. Same goes for the French.

Wars a futile full stop.

Here is a big if and consideration.

Let us say South Korea (far bigger better and richer country - for aguements sake) opens borders with North Korea.

The ruling elite takes as it's new leader the NK son of the old dirt bag. Becomes China's begotten new son. Integrates with the great trading block.

Now China thinks hey we just united with Korea and this little **** in the North is a pain in our side. Let's sit down and talk as to how we can maximise our gains.

SK asks China for help the growing power instead of USA the dwindling bully of the region.

Hey presto - everyone is happy - give or take a few people in high office - citizens all gain, country gains no bullets fired and no deaths.

WIN WIN WIN...

Simple scenario that could be played out via diplomatic channels that would easily get rid of a tyrant and unite Korea to China.

 

[Hilarymannah]

The reason I don't answer the question, is because I'm fully aware of the cyclical nature of debate!
The truth is a lot simpler,....

"Most people who claim to seek the truth, really only want confirmation of those things which they already believe. Truth would require that they abandon their "comfort zones" and do something concrete-to make real changes in their lives",......

 

[Atilla]

The reason I don't answer the question, is because I'm fully aware of the cyclical nature of debate!
The truth is a lot simpler,....

"Most people who claim to seek the truth, really only want confirmation of those things which they already believe. Truth would require that they abandon their "comfort zones" and do something concrete-to make real changes in their lives",......

That's cool and I agree 200%.

This is how I like to or try to think from the opposite angles. Usually I end up being nailed to the cross as some traitor or crescent kisser.

 

[Atilla]

Except perhaps that it may be in somebody's interests for these tensions to continue!

(P.S. if you think citizens count for ****, you are more naive than I give you credit for )

I'm wondering what's in it for the US sending their carrier to the region. Possibly business to build yet another nuclear reactor / base???

Keep China in check?

How much does it cost to keep that carrier afloat travelling per mile?

Perhaps I am naive? Who knows. Maybe I'm deluded... Just another human plodder...

 

[spreader_legger]

Sorry, I didn't actually take time to read just how rediculous your previous post was.

Why not open our borders to China? What a bit like Tibet did? Or perhaps what the Czechs did during the Second World War?

Yeah right ... If I were China & gained the upper hand, I'd really give a s*it what my new satellite state thought! Why share the wealth when you can give it to your cronies ala Mugabe and ZANU PF

Take your blinkers off man! you live in cloud cuckoo land

 

[spreader_legger]

what I meant by self interest was from the point of view of the Chinese regime .... afterall, this would ensure its voice was that much stronger in any international negotiations.

Wars also mobilise the population against a common enemy (perhaps less pertinent in this instance) but it certainly helped Thatcher to gain public support during the Falklands

 

[spreader_legger]

The reasons why you are not familiar with what Ratzinger said, is because all that you beloved media broadcast was the child sex scandals

Incidentally, it gave considerable voice to the alleged human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell who wanted to arrest the pope when he landed in the UK

It is quite interesting to note, that this very same left wing, sandal wearing freak was advocating sex with minors several years ago during a conference, stating that consensual sex with minors was the last taboo to be lifted.

Ofcourse I don't expect you to believe this, given that you're a product of their indoctrination. Or perhaps you will come out with some kinnd of excuse for it all?

Not familiar with his work or writings but relations between religious leaders and kings through out history were hand in hand and very much strained and constant strugle. I am glad we have secular rule of law where stupid religion plays no part.

As for freedom - I'm not sure I could say the things I do on these boards if I were in good many other countries.

If I have the financial means I can pretty much do what ever I choose. First I have to earn that entitlement.

I could stand up on my soap box in Hyde Park Corner and speak till the cows come home.


This nonsense about banks trying to control us with debt and so on is a load of rubbish. That ODDT's video was absolute tosh. Guy sits on a chair in front of a fireplace and tells us Plasma screens and gizmos are created to enslave us. It was at that point I realised it is all a load of ********.

As often is the case because some fruitcake says something that suits our arguement he defends a daft position.

imho he is no different to a white racist except he is black. Prejudice lives in us all. Difficult to identify who we really are. We are certainly not the ego as that is just a thief in us all that steals our true purpose in life imho.

Enough said I think. I trangress.