http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130326/DEFREG02/303260020/U-S-Army-Learns-Hard-Lessons-N-Korea-like-War-Game
Very interesting article on US army wargame.
Maybe it is a hard lesson if you want to invade. Why bother, you dont need their problems tagged on to yours. If they attack a 3rd time send in missiles, bombs, derogatory leaflets, etc but do not invade. After the end of the Kims they can clean it up.
Two thoughts.
First, this may be some kind of bass ackward olive branch indicating to the Norks that we're not eager to really fight. Because although we want to prepare for their idiotic ranting, we're not really interested in taking an offensive posture.
Second, invading them isn't the major problem - it's in avoiding the follow-on humanitarian catastrophe...which is what the article somewhat casually notes. The issue isn't overruning the the Norks - it's fixing all the starving civilians that they've spent the last half-century creating. Keeping them from flooding into China and South Korea is the objective those two countries will have at the top of their priority list. It's also an objective that's going to be hugely difficult given the fluidity of a war zone. All it takes is money and *lots* of boots on the ground - two things that we presently don't have an excess of.
Having said that just follow the Bush/Cheney doctrine...Just Do It Anyway. What Could Go Wrong? USMC Becomes Official Advance Group For Haliburton!
nah...
invading Iraq and Afganistan really didnt have that much effect on economic markets as neither country had crap all to do with international trade. South Korea is a whole different fish to fry.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on March 31, 2013, 10:15:39 PM
nah...
invading Iraq and Afganistan really didnt have that much effect on economic markets as neither country had crap all to do with international trade. South Korea is a whole different fish to fry.
+1
Apples and Oranges.
Well the Iraq thing was a couple of trillion bucks that had to be borrowed from China.
That has had some economic effect somewhere.
your thinking of a cost spred out over a decade with a country that really had no foreign trade. Im talking about Korea that has trillions in trade around the globe yearly and is a central piece in the Pacific Rim and global markets. no stock market got messed up when we bombed Baghdad. every market will tank when Seoul gets creamed during the first 72 hours of a war in Korea. and for what its worth China has less then 10% of our debt so its a strawman argument.
I am not arguing about anything. US can't afford to fight wars and not raise taxes.
now what youre doing is changing the topic.
Quote from: Longdan on March 31, 2013, 11:58:07 PM
I am not arguing about anything. US can't afford to fight wars and not raise taxes.
it would be nice if the 'free world' paid some of the bill once in a while.
They do sometimes but have shown a marked reluctance to participate in hare brained schemes which seems to have no purpose.
When told to mind their own business they did.
This case is different of course.
Quote from: Longdan on April 01, 2013, 10:14:41 AM
They do sometimes but have shown a marked reluctance to participate in hare brained schemes which seems to have no purpose.
like the Suez, Libya, Indochina, Mali, the Falklands, Chad, Korea and Yugoslavia?
A couple of those turned out the way they were supposed to.
which ones?
the Falklands are becoming an issue again.
the Suez threw Israel under the bus and is still a point of contention.
Korea... well just look at the news.
Yugoslavia was a disaster of NATO policy.
so far Mali is inconclusive as is Libya.
Chad... meh
Well those are all your judgement call.
You will have to find somebody else to argue with. I have porn to watch.