Who do you fear? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-13-2002, 05:47 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 01:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Well you simply list several weapons systems purchase without putting that into any CONTEXT! If you want a rundown of the military balance on the Korean Penisula I can give you that! I can also give you a similar run down of Chinese military forces in close proximity to the region. Only when you see these weapons purchase's in light of the threat that they face can you begin to understand why Korea has such need for weapons and why it is important that US troops remained stationed in South Korea. My Father over the course of a 30 year military career served to full year asignments in South Korea! My best friend, A Cobra Helicopter Pilot in the US Marine Corp was in South Korea this last spring.

These corporations that make this US equipment are vital to the lives of are men and women in the armed forces. This technology helps them to win wars quickly and with minimum loss of life! I have several friends who are engineers and who work for several different Corporations that build weapons for the United States and our allies. Their work and what they produce are a vital part of international security!

Again, I'd be happy to post the military balance, listing the equipment holdings and dispostion of military units on the Korean Penisula and similar data on China if you want to understand the context under which we supply these weapons to South Korea!
Yes, if you want to, post. It is clear to everyone anyway that not only the U.S. is producing weapons or training military forces. Russia, China, North Korea... (apart from Great Britian, France, Germany, Italy,...) the question is do you think that China and North Korea would bomb a region in East Asia to force down an excessive expansion policy?

I can also understand that the U.S. equipment protects the lives of the armed forces. Sure, weapons have a certain use (if not no one would buy them). And you can always argue that the "enemy" has the same kind of weapons (nearly) . Nevertheless, weapons are generally not a product like, say, oranges, or papers, or cars, or cdīs. Weapons kill, hurt, create incredible pain around the world. Then, weapons are often sold illegally, and often get into hands that shouldnīt even get near to arms. If that wasnīt enough, they are used by organised crime all over the world in weapons-against-drugs-deals. I would go as far as saying, if you add every positive and negative effect that weapons have had through history, the negative effects do have a huge overweight.

I know that by a soldier who works for his country things may be seen differently; another kind of logical system, which is the same straightforward like my logical system. What I wanted to point out apart from that, is that South Korea actually seems well equipped so I doubt that in this region a war is going to explode, if the U.S. or China donīt provoke it because of national interests. Now, China... I donīt know... havenīt heard of nothing from China... any evil there?
__________________

__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 09-13-2002, 06:09 AM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 01:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Countries to fear are those whose' behavior plus Weapons of Mass destruction make them threats to the rest of us. Countries like Iraq, then North Korea, Iran, and Syria are the dangerous countries today.

The Soviet Union is no more, and Russia military strength is a tiny fraction of the Soviet Unions. While Russia has failed to develop economically it is still trying, and it is still a semi-democracy after 10 years. Russia's severly weakened state, their adoption of western economic and political practices, and their desire for closer cooperation and trade with the west combine to make them no longer a threat like the Soviet Union was.

China's military continue's to be reduced. They now have less than 2.4 million in their total armed forces. China is surrounded by relatively strong military powers like, India, Russia, Pakistan, Vietnam, and North and South Korea. The Chinese military in technology is 30 years behind the west. China's most likely threat is to Tawain, and it is unlikely that China would ever attack, because Tawain actually could defeat a Chinese attack without foriegn assistance. China's navy is tiny, and the number of vessels that China has to sea-lift troops is tiny as well, at tops about 10,000. China could also airlift maybe another 5,000 troops to attack Tawain, but so what. Tawain has a standing army of over 150,000 and nearly 500,000 when reserves are called up. China's total deployable force to Tawain only numbers 15 to 20 thousand.

China's economic ties are also a reason they would not invade Tawain. They have strong economic ties with Tawain as well as the rest of the world. China does not want to forgo the hundreds of billions of dollars that international trade brings to their country every year. It is surrounded by militarily strong neighbors. So even if China has expansionist fantasy's, they are contained.

So the bad boys on the block are Iraq, North Korea, Syria and Iran. They may not be capable of a massive nuclear attack on the USA, but they still have capability to cause mass destruction both human and economic due to their resources, possible ties to terrorist, and their proximity to important Global resources like oil, and proximity to other places of economic value.
And if I may take into account what you were saying here, the bad boy in this region is only North Korea, who isnīt capable of a nuclear attack on the U.S.A. So what about your worries? Do you think that the U.S. (and possibly Great British) interests are valid on all the planet?

Do North Korean authorities really support terrorism? If so, then please name some officials. Many countries have the capability to cause mass destruction.

What do you mean by other places of economic value? And oil, yes we know we are still dependent on oil, but wouldnīt it be a better approach to sign a few treaties about not blowing so much oil/ gas into the world so the climate stays a little more stable, if not fine.

But, those are not "American" interests, I guess. I ask myself what the average American citizen gets for Bushs policies, which are in reality those of the arms and the oil industry.

Jobs? Not, if Boeing fired 30,000 workers due to a cut in the corporations policies.

Security? Not, if the continous role of the worlds protector, that was implemented by the U.S. policy on itself (imagine if China would say so!), continues to be viewed with anger by some folks on this planet earth (not by me).

A better environment for our children? No, our grandchildren will live in a world with less animals, more pollution, less sun, higher sea, more hurricanes,... who knows, maybe we have to hide like rabbits in caves in a few hundred years, because our great generation cared only about itself.

Just for the interests of a few corporations that betray the average American consumer and taxpayer every day.
__________________

__________________
hiphop is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ÂĐ Interference.com