North Korea

[57Brave]

Between June of 1950 and July of 1953, over 36,000 American troops died in the Korean War. That’s a fraction of the 373,000 lost by the South Korean military—and that still doesn’t include 138,000 civilian deaths. Losses on the other side of the conflict may have topped 600,000 North Koreans and Chinese deaths.



Is it possible to retain stability on the Korean penisula? Yes. Sixty plus years of relative peace says that’s true. But it’s hard to think of any region that enjoyed a similar period of stability whose story begins with the phrase “first we carried out a preemptive strike...”

............................

Oh, I know it bothers Hawk when I insert articles that get the who what whens and wheres right but don't fit his short sighted world view .
But hey, I'm a big boy and think I can take his scorn.
Besides he can just whistle past the graveyard if he likes, and like normal wonder "what happened"

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017...-failed-policy

[Hawk]

I don't scorn you because you know next to nothing about Korea, but I will always scorn you for propping up the Breitbart of the left as a legitimate source of information.

'Relative' peace ... ah, the gloss over. You've gotten pretty good at it.

[57Brave]

Please show your math.

When I was a kid we used to have to walk past this big dog on a chain for 6 years walk past this dog and about two years into it we all realize the stock was on a chain and he wasn't going to hurt anybody but he would bark and he would growl and he would show his teeth but he wasn't going to hurt anyone

[Hawk]

Ugh.

So all this boils down to, from your perspective, is whether or not America is at immediate risk?

That echo chamber needs a new worldview (or just a better understanding of how the world works).

[57Brave]

To your mis understood point that Kos being the mirror of Brietbart. Shows the limits of your reading either Kos or Brietbart.

The term I am looking for ... false equivliancy.

[57Brave]

First and foremost, yes.

[Hawk]

To your mis understood point that Kos being the mirror of Brietbart. Shows the limits of your reading either Kos or Brietbart.

The term I am looking for ... false equivliancy.

Breitbart has credentialed staff, at least.

DailyKOS is just a blog that harvests content from its users and publishes it as news.

You are what you eat.

[Hawk]

First and foremost, yes.

Wow, that makes you about as much of a nationalist as Steve Bannon.

[57Brave]

Breitbart has credentialed staff, at least.

DailyKOS is just a blog that harvests content from its users and publishes it as news.

You are what you eat.

That has what to do with the premise of the article ?

Who what when and where. The 4 W's of journalism 101. And the fifth W ? Is Why.
You disagree with the why --- at least back it up using the other 4 to make your point

Kim Jun Um is that Boxer on a chain.
(R) presidencies have been ( those pesky who what whens and wheres again ) like the brave kid that taunted that that boxer --- on a chain --- with a stick

[57Brave]

Wow, that makes you about as much of a nationalist as Steve Bannon.

I have held a non interventionist stand since Bannon was still poking that dog with a stick

[Hawk]

Kim Jun Um

I rest my case.

[57Brave]

As you rest your case perhaps you could do some research refuting the Daily Kos article.

Curious to see

[Hawk]

As you rest your case perhaps you could do some research refuting the Daily Kos article.

Curious to see

My argument is already on the record.

See posts #40, #46, #63, #71, #73

There's nothing to refute in the blog post you linked.

It's the blithely simple-minded opinion that the status quo is better than war.

When the status quo is comprised of 30 million oppressed, 50 million directly threatened, and 130 million at risk, that special breed of idiotic logic is a non-starter.

[57Brave]

" It's the blithely simple-minded opinion that the status quo is better than war. "
- Hawk

[57Brave]

My argument is already on the record.

See posts #40, #46, #63, #71, #73

There's nothing to refute in the blog post you linked.

It's the blithely simple-minded opinion that the status quo is better than war.

When the status quo is comprised of 30 million oppressed, 50 million directly threatened, and 130 million at risk, that special breed of idiotic logic is a non-starter.

That would be the same argument the past (R) Administrations used to arm , invade and occupy
a) Viet Nam
b) Afghanistan
c) Iraq
d) Grenada
e) Panama
f) guessing we could go back to Korea again
..................

Same argument European Missionaries used to colonize Africa

Until there is provocation -- the status quo has been reletivly peaceful
I keep looking for that provocation on the part of N Korea.

Toward anyone. S Korea,Japan, GranFenwick etc etc etc

[Hawk]

Not my argument, you posted the blog piece and keep unashamedly propping it up.

There's no war happening here.
There's not going to be a draft.
There's not going to be a boxer on a chain, as it were.

[57Brave]

I keep propping it up because there are valid points.

Points that need to be recognized in this rush to conflict for the sake of conflict

[Hawk]

That would be the same argument the past (R) Administrations used to arm , invade and occupy
a) Viet Nam
b) Afghanistan
c) Iraq
d) Grenada
e) Panama
f) guessing we could go back to Korea again

Now this is a correct example of false equivalency.

Nobody (at all) is talking about invading and occupying except you and your Daily KOS buddies.

It's not going to happen. It's logistically impossible.

Quit glossing.

[Hawk]

Kim Jun Um is preparing to test a nuclear warhead less than ~100 miles from 50 million of our allies and 30K American troops ... but we're rushing to conflict.

Got it. This status quo is awesome!

When you talk about being an 'isolationist' do you really just mean sticking your head in the sand?

[57Brave]

Now this is a correct example of false equivalency.

Nobody (at all) is talking about invading and occupying except you and your Daily KOS buddies.

It's not going to happen. It's logistically impossible.

Quit glossing.

Then who-what -when -where handles the "peace"
after we accomplish regime change

we destabilize N Korea then what?
I read this morning S Korean President is in the soup. That government is un stable

Do you trust Trump to handle this ?