Kim Jong-Il dies suddenly!

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

North Korea's official KCNA news agency quoted his son, Kim Jong-un as saying: "I'm so ronery...."

[Wrider]

Congrats to the Western Powers' top spy for slipping that cyanide tablet into his food.

[Ezzzzy1]

Team America! Fuck yea!

[rforsythe]

I think a collective 23 people worldwide are actually upset about it, too.

[asp_125]

I heard he fell "Il"....

His young successor will be called..... "Li'l Kim"

[sprtbkbabe]

The Onion's "Remembering Kim Jong Il"


Kim Jong Il unfolds into Giant Robot:


http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/8/Kim-Jong-Il-Unfolds-C_jpg_630x463_pad-black_upscale_q85.jpg



Kim Jong Il ends Nuclear Program for Lead in Next Batman:


http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/18702/101---02-KIM_JONG_IL_BATMAN_WEBSTILL_jpg_630x463_pad-black_upscale_q85.jpg



North Korea releases new paintings of healthy Kim Jong Il:


http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/6496/North-Korea-R_0_jpg_630x463_pad-black_upscale_q85.jpg

[Ezzzzy1]

They dont know how old the "kid" is that is going to be running their great country but he was born sometime between 1983 and 1984. Im sure this is going to work out just fine...

One of my favorite facts that North Koreans were told about their fearless leader =

"In 1994, it was reported by Pyongyang media outlets that Kim Jong Il shot 38 under par on a regulation 18-hole golf course – including 5 holes in one! That score is 25 shots better than the best round in history, and is made even more amazing by the fact that it was his first time playing the sport. It’s said Kim Jong Il would routinely sink 3 or 4 holes in one per round of golf, and – lucky for the PGA – he has since given it up."

[mdub]

Team America! Fuck yea!



http://www.morethings.com/fan/south_park/team_america/day.jpg

[Grand]

I wanted jong-nam to take over, this is a real shame.

[modette99]

Bad Year for Dictators

http://pics.kuvaton.com/kuvei/2011_-_bad_year_for_dictators.jpg

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Actually, from a military perspective, while their chain of command is disrupted, now would be the PERFECT time to immediately blitzkrieg them and flatten any nuclear and ICBM capabilities forever.

Oh, and....


America, Fuck YEAH! :)

[asp_125]

So Kim Jong Il is now Kim Jong Dead?

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

So Kim Jong Il is now Kim Jong Dead?
He's now Kim Jong-Chill........

[Zanatos]

R.I.P. Great Leader. The world is thinking of you!

[rforsythe]

Actually, from a military perspective, while their chain of command is disrupted, now would be the PERFECT time to immediately blitzkrieg them and flatten any nuclear and ICBM capabilities forever.


No, that would provoke world war three because their allies would unleash hell. I'm pretty sure their chain of command would react to that too. And well, it would be nice if our troops got to be home for more than a week before getting re-deployed into an even worse shitstorm.

Let's say we did have something to do with his death though... They can't prove it, but might know it anyway, and it's a good ego-flattener for Junior to keep his nuts in check. The US could never admit to anything like that publicly without instigating war, but hypothetically if it was a triggered event, it sends a powerful message to any would-be dictator wannabes.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

No, that would provoke world war three because their allies would unleash hell. I'm pretty sure their chain of command would react to that too. And well, it would be nice if our troops got to be home for more than a week before getting re-deployed into an even worse shitstorm.

Let's say we did have something to do with his death though... They can't prove it, but might know it anyway, and it's a good ego-flattener for Junior to keep his nuts in check. The US could never admit to anything like that publicly without instigating war, but hypothetically if it was a triggered event, it sends a powerful message to any would-be dictator wannabes.
china would be pissed, but if we could get in there fast enough to level their nuclear and ICBM mfg capabilities and not actually kill any Chinese troops (hence the short window of opportunity), I don't believe they'd do anything but whine about it. They're crazy, but they're not that crazy. They'd be slitting their own throats.......we buy all the stuff they can make! Even if they actually won, their econy would be ruined. Where do you think they're getting all the money to build their war machine? ;)

[Ghost]

Actually, from a military perspective, while their chain of command is disrupted, now would be the PERFECT time to immediately blitzkrieg them and flatten any nuclear and ICBM capabilities forever.


I can't tell if you're joking/wishful thinking or completely deluded/out of touch with reality.

KJI is dead, big deal, he's a figurehead, their CoC isn't SO disrupted that they wouldn't notice an attack, nor would they not respond--and even if they can't attack us, they can sure as shit nuke S Korea and Japan, and thus WW III begins and all the 2012 prophecy bullshit can be fulfilled. Yay.

[rforsythe]

china would be pissed, but if we could get in there fast enough to level their nuclear and ICBM mfg capabilities and not actually kill any Chinese troops (hence the short window of opportunity), I don't believe they'd do anything but whine about it. They're crazy, but they're not that crazy. They'd be slitting their own throats.......we buy all the stuff they can make! Even if they actually won, their econy would be ruined. Where do you think they're getting all the money to build their war machine? ;)

NK's threat is not just nuclear. They have enough conventional warfare (artillery, etc) pointed at Seoul to fully level the city before anyone could do a thing about it.

Declaring war on an Asian country like NK is not a simple thing. The mere act of bombing their facilities like you suggest would likely result in millions of Koreans dying, and a massive multi-national pissing contest shortly thereafter. Iran would probably step in, compelling China, compelling Russia, and then all of our allies are compelled to help us as well. If some asshole didn't lob a nuke or three it would be a miracle.

No, I think it's enough to just let Junior know where he stands in the international pecking (pecker?) order and make sure he cools his shit better than his dad could. NK knows we're not about to instigate frontal warfare on them without a damn good reason (and being belligerent twats is not one, not on this scale), but that doesn't mean we can't touch them.

[Snowman]

I can't tell if you're joking/wishful thinking or completely deluded/out of touch with reality.I believe that answer to your question is yes and yes...

Frank being a typical Nationalistic Conservative believes that this nation under its god has not only the right but is ordained to spread it's influence to every other part of the world through whatever means it sees as justified.

It's scary these people still exist but I see their influence becoming less over time as the world become more global and the idea of the power nation states becomes less.

[Ghost]

I believe that answer to your question is yes and yes...

Frank being a typical Nationalistic Conservative believes that this nation under its god has not only the right but is ordained to spread it's influence to every other part of the world through whatever means it sees as justified.

It's scary these people still exist but I see their influence becoming less over time as the world become more global and the idea of the power nation states becomes less.

Imperialistic Jingoism is alive and well, despite being out of time and place (and practicality).

I'm not sure the influence will become less, as power (wealth) consolidates, those with power will be more able to broadcast and enforce (inflict) their view upon the world, while those who would oppose it will be/have been marginalized and stripped of rights and/or ability to influence the world.

Add into that the coming scarcity of resources and it's fertile ground for an upswing in nationalistic fervor and the associated denigration of everyone else (foreign power and unfavored citizen alike).

Joy.


...any open jobs in Antarctica?

[Ezzzzy1]

I believe that answer to your question is yes and yes...

Frank being a typical Nationalistic Conservative believes that this nation under its god has not only the right but is ordained to spread it's influence to every other part of the world through whatever means it sees as justified.

It's scary these people still exist but I see their influence becoming less over time as the world become more global and the idea of the power nation states becomes less.

Sooo you think its a good idea that North Korea has nukes?

[Clovis]

Kim Jung Il "facts" are like the Chuck Norris facts from a few years ago. Except the people believe them.

[Grand]

Relevant:
http://kimjongillookingatthings.tumblr.com/

[derekm]

just a though... maybe we should just mind our own business and stay out of other continents.... Any takers on how long before iraq is in shambles again?

[Clovis]

http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/x469/jdharward/kim_jongcrazyenough.jpg

[mdub]

Relevant:
http://kimjongillookingatthings.tumblr.com/



http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvdxjr2vPS1qewv1lo1_500.jpg (http://www.tumblr.com/photo/1280/13461514559/1/tumblr_lvdxjr2vPS1qewv1l)

PIMPIN

[Clovis]

ROFL - Hilarious N. Korea tourism video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HK3Ttb43OI

[Grand]

North Korea's so remix worthy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJNBfBr-OGU

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

NK's threat is not just nuclear. They have enough conventional warfare (artillery, etc) pointed at Seoul to fully level the city before anyone could do a thing about it.

Declaring war on an Asian country like NK is not a simple thing. The mere act of bombing their facilities like you suggest would likely result in millions of Koreans dying, and a massive multi-national pissing contest shortly thereafter. Iran would probably step in, compelling China, compelling Russia, and then all of our allies are compelled to help us as well. If some asshole didn't lob a nuke or three it would be a miracle.

No, I think it's enough to just let Junior know where he stands in the international pecking (pecker?) order and make sure he cools his shit better than his dad could. NK knows we're not about to instigate frontal warfare on them without a damn good reason (and being belligerent twats is not one, not on this scale), but that doesn't mean we can't touch them.
I'd imagine at least one of our boomers is sitting RIGHT there, making it far faster than they could do anything to S. Korea.

If we'd have stopped the Russians at the end of WWII we'd be the only country with nukes, and, I believe the world would have been far safer for it.

And still, who knows what their C.O.C. really is, and if they could react as fast as we could. In a situation like that, mere minutes make a huge difference John, especially with a boomer sitting off their coast. ;)

[mdub]

finding some good ones, Grand....:up:

[Ghost]

If we'd have stopped the Russians at the end of WWII we'd be the only country with nukes, and, I believe the world would have been far safer for it.

And still, who knows what their C.O.C. really is, and if they could react as fast as we could. In a situation like that, mere minutes make a huge difference John, especially with a boomer sitting off their coast.

Patton pushed for it--wanted to take the remains of the Wehrmacht and our other allies and march on Stalingrad (and really, who killed more of his own people, Hitler or Stalin?). But, his regular driver was swapped out and he was killed in a car accident...so...that ended that idea.

As for the world being safer if only we had the bomb--you're forgetting that we're the only country to have ever used the bomb, which doesn't give us the best track record.

You really think a "preemptive" strike, which they've been waiting 50 years for, would work? Even if they got just one nuke to Japan or S. Korea that'd already be far worse than any good that could come from such a raid--assuming it'd even be successful, which there's no guarantee of.

[cbrjohnny]

just a though... maybe we should just mind our own business and stay out of other continents.... Any takers on how long before iraq is in shambles again?


i think iraq is in shambles... so, not long.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Patton pushed for it--wanted to take the remains of the Wehrmacht and our other allies and march on Stalingrad (and really, who killed more of his own people, Hitler or Stalin?). But, his regular driver was swapped out and he was killed in a car accident...so...that ended that idea.
If I remember, that idea was shot down by the sitting president. Shame, because he was 100% right.


As for the world being safer if only we had the bomb--you're forgetting that we're the only country to have ever used the bomb, which doesn't give us the best track record.
Going to prove my point. It ended the war in record time, did it not? That was the ultimate deterrent. Also, people want to gloss over this, but the firebombings of Japan killed far more people than the nukes. If w hadn't stopped the war then, it would have killed more people.


You really think a "preemptive" strike, which they've been waiting 50 years for, would work? Even if they got just one nuke to Japan or S. Korea that'd already be far worse than any good that could come from such a raid--assuming it'd even be successful, which there's no guarantee of.
Absolutely, or I wouldn't have even have suggested it. They can wait 50 years for it, but that doesn't mean they are ready for it. ;) One boomer, sitting off their coast (and I'm sure there is ALWAYS one in the area), could take care of it almost instantly, with the EMP disrupting their capability to retaliate. From what I remember, N. Korea does not have the ICBM capability to pull off a strike against Japan, though they would probably be able to hit S. Korea with a conventional long-range missile, though they may not even have a nuke version of anything like that yet. Not that I take such a thing lightly, but this lunatic, and his lunatic son, pose a major risk to everyone. I HOPE Jr. can be persuaded with reason, but I doubt it.

.

[jbnwc]

I'm hoping Steve Jobs got to Jr. with some Apple stuff and Jr. will be addicted to progress like the rest of the world.

[WolFeYeZ]

Ummm... Somehow South Korea didn't hear about his death until just now :P
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/world/asia/in-detecting-kim-jong-il-death-a-gobal-intelligence-failure.html

[rforsythe]

I'd imagine at least one of our boomers is sitting RIGHT there, making it far faster than they could do anything to S. Korea.

Most of NK's army (1.2 million active duty, something like 9.5 million with reserves and others), which is trained and equipped particularly well for fucking up the South, is stationed along the DMZ about 25 miles from Seoul. Not to mention the fact that we could not launch nukes of significant size or quantity to stop all of that without causing massive damage to the south as well. Plus fallout, damaging our own troops in the area, etc etc. And then let's not forget that NK's closest allies are China and Russia: two countries with a massive nuclear arsenal that could flatten the US if provoked, and a history of incredibly violent behavior that dates back exponentially longer than the US has even existed (before Europeans killed off the injin's and took it, that is).


If we'd have stopped the Russians at the end of WWII we'd be the only country with nukes, and, I believe the world would have been far safer for it.

You really think that? You really think nobody else since then would have discovered how to do it, and we'd just be the big-dick-swinging nation of all nations forever? And how exactly would we have "stopped the Russians"? Nuke them? Mass genocide does not a great nation make.


And still, who knows what their C.O.C. really is, and if they could react as fast as we could. In a situation like that, mere minutes make a huge difference John, especially with a boomer sitting off their coast. ;)

Even if we got lucky with a couple bombs, their military likely has orders to unleash hell in the event of catastrophe. Kim Jong Il was nuts, not stupid.

If it were just as easy as "chuck a couple nukes over the fence and run like hell, nobody will mind" don't you think we'd have done it by now?

I don't even know why I'm arguing the logic of why it'd be bad to start WW3, or why mutually-assured destruction is generally viewed as negative behavior, or why killing millions of civilians just to hit some military targets is just about at the top of "last resort options" with you. You have a long standing history of wanting to glass over any country that disagrees with your world view, this thread isn't going to change it.

[rforsythe]

This is a good read too...
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/12/kim-dead-north-korea-missile/

[Nick_Ninja]

I believe that answer to your question is yes and yes...

Frank being a typical Nationalistic Conservative believes that this nation under its god has not only the right but is ordained to spread it's influence to every other part of the world through whatever means it sees as justified.

It's scary these people still exist but I see their influence becoming less over time as the world become more global and the idea of the power nation states becomes less.

Bingo :applause:

[Ghost]

Bingo :applause:

I feel we've an honorary member in:

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/9/29/128987301340432670.jpg

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

I believe that answer to your question is yes and yes...

Frank being a typical Nationalistic Conservative believes that this nation under its god has not only the right but is ordained to spread it's influence to every other part of the world through whatever means it sees as justified.

It's scary these people still exist but I see their influence becoming less over time as the world become more global and the idea of the power nation states becomes less.
I guess we could be considered scary.......to those that wet their bed whenever a loud noise occurs outside their window at night......:p

And, actually, that's wrong I'm not into spreading our influence, simply protecting ourselves from lunatics like this. Wanna talk batshit crazy, that'd be KJI, and, probably, his son as well.

[RajunCajun]

Say what you want about Frank, but if you don't have the biggest stick, then that means someone else does. Would I rather have it and be able to chose whether or not to use it, or let someone else have that I know is an evil bastard and going to kick my ass with it??? I don't know what kind of math you guys do, but it's an easy choice for me.

[Snowman]

Say what you want about Frank, but if you don't have the biggest stick, then that means someone else does. Would I rather have it and be able to chose whether or not to use it, or let someone else have that I know is an evil bastard and going to kick my ass with it??? I don't know what kind of math you guys do, but it's an easy choice for me.The math you talk about is the same math that everyone else uses. That is the reason other nations have nuclear weapons, because the math is the same everywhere.

There is no way to prevent a determined country, group or person from creating a weapon of this type. Which if everyone has a bomb would make your big stick theory irrelevant. It only requires a few of these devices to destroy an enemy (one set off anywhere in the US would collapse our economy back to the 1890’s) and only take a few more than that to destroy the world.

The big stick idea only works if you are the only one with the big stick, and then for only a short amount of time before your neighbor ether gets a big stick themselves or sees you as a threat to the neighborhood and undermines you with all of the other neighbors.

The big stick policy leaves out that we are a part of the world economy. We are a global community now and can’t go back to living within the borders of the US. If 40 years of cold war has taught us anything, we are safer being interdependent on every other nation in the world than isolated with weapon painted at each other.

[Ezzzzy1]

The math you talk about is the same math that everyone else uses. That is the reason other nations have nuclear weapons, because the math is the same everywhere.

There is no way to prevent a determined country, group or person from creating a weapon of this type. Which if everyone has a bomb would make your big stick theory irrelevant. It only requires a few of these devices to destroy an enemy (one set off anywhere in the US would collapse our economy back to the 1890’s) and only take a few more than that to destroy the world.

The big stick idea only works if you are the only one with the big stick, and then for only a short amount of time before your neighbor ether gets a big stick themselves or sees you as a threat to the neighborhood and undermines you with all of the other neighbors.

The big stick policy leaves out that we are a part of the world economy. We are a global community now and can’t go back to living within the borders of the US. If 40 years of cold war has taught us anything, we are safer being interdependent on every other nation in the world than isolated with weapon painted at each other.

Sure, thats why we are part of a larger group that makes decisions as a whole. That group has said that certain countries are at a higher risk for irresponsibly using nuclear weapons and because of the irreversible bad side of using them the group tries to limit who can have them.

I get the math side but anyone that thinks ANY country that wants nukes should have them is out of their mind especially because you cant fight a nuclear war with nuclear weapons, it would destroy this place.

We can and should prevent the manufacturing of these weapons by countries that will use them. Its that simple.

[rforsythe]

Russia seeks to make a bigger stick:
http://packetstormsecurity.org/news/view/20368/Russia-Works-On-100-Ton-Monster-Ballistic-Missile.html

[Ghost]

Russia seeks to make a bigger stick:
http://packetstormsecurity.org/news/view/20368/Russia-Works-On-100-Ton-Monster-Ballistic-Missile.html

Or they could just EMP us (like in COD)

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/15-12-2011/119974-A_Nightmare_Scenario_for_America-0/


Imagine one day that suddenly and without warning, every single vehicle in the United States built after the 1970s was totally incapable of running. No going up to the grocery store, in fact no more food deliveries by truck anymore to your local store.

There would be no trains, planes or buses running. Only muscle powered canoes on the waterways.


Imagine that there is no longer any electricity. You cannot keep your food from spoiling in the refrigerator. There is no heat, no air conditioning. No electric tools or appliances work. There is no way to pump water to your house, so you are also without water.
Imagine that there is no telephone service of any sort. You cannot communicate with anyone unless you walk to where they are. Which means, too, no computers, no internet, no cellular phones or iPods, no television or radio.


Your world is silent except for the occasional bird chirp or dog barking...which won't last long with no food for the dog. Perhaps there might be human screams of hunger...or despair.
The country has been transported back to the stone age. Your ability to grow your own food is limited to your access to seeds and whether or not you get enough rain.


There are riots in the cities. The only people who have access to fresh food are those with guns who can hunt and those by bodies of water with edible fish.


The supply of canned goods is rapidly going down to nothing. As are the matches that light your grill, the only way to cook. Factories are not producing anything to replace what is consumed.
Russia's take on WW III?:


With nuclear missile technology what it is today, the next war could very well be the world's last. As it becomes clear that the Pentagon/NATO is intrinsically linked to the AIPAC/State Department axis, as it becomes clear that the USA and its allies have long since ceased to follow the law, it would appear that we are sliding towards disaster. The tell-tale signs are all there. The former status quo which was achieved by a Soviet Bloc able and willing to counteract the more aggressive and belligerent tendencies of those who had been imperialist powers and their allies, gaining riches as they held populations down under the yoke of colonialism, stealing their riches and committing massacres as they civilised the planet with the Bible and the Bullet approach to international relations, disappeared at the beginning of the 1990s.

For once and for all, let us get the story straight. The Soviet Union did not "collapse", it dissolved voluntarily, as catered for in its constitution because a new political, economic and social cycle had begun with different players and vectors and those in Government considered that the old model had succeeded in achieving what it set out to do, namely bring medieval societies into the front line of social, industrial and economic development, providing excellent public services free of charge.

However, a major consequence of this dissolution was the vacuum in international relations caused by the absence of the counterweight against the sinister plans of Washington and her NATO allies, which are only too plain to see. Before the decade was up, in 1998, we had Afghanistan's Mullah Omar being approached with a bribe to set up a pipeline across his country from Central Asia to Pakistan and the game was then on.

The flashpoint was 9/11 and with the Bush regime in place, the game swung into action. Afghanistan was invaded in retaliation, although the link between Kabul and Kandahar and the Twin Towers has yet to be proven, and we now discover that Afghanistan itself is rich in mineral resources, apart from presenting a strategic bridge deep into Central Asia together with a billionaire drugs trade in heroin production and smuggling.
World War Three is not about containing hegemonic ideals, it is not about defeating ideology. This time around, it is based upon greed, the desire to control the world's resources and it therefore comes as no surprise that all the pieces of the puzzle are centred around the epicentre of these resources - the Middle East and Central Asia, removing those powers who would constitute a block. It began after Kosovo, a test of forces, an arm-wrestling contest to see which side would blink first while under the table empty promises were traded, as they have been all along.
It continued with Iraq, invaded illegally and virtually destroyed in the most blatant disregard for international law the world had seen, before Libya confirmed what is going on. It has nothing to do with freedom and democracy, if so then why did NATO refuse to allow the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to hold a democratic election for the people to choose between the NATO/NTC Terrorists and the Jamahiriya Government?

It has already begun in Iran, with cyber terrorist attacks against Iran's nuclear power capacity, with violations of Iran's airspace and with terrorist attacks inside the country aimed at Revolutionary Guard Officers, military centres and equipment. And for those who doubt who lies at the end of the railway line, the deployment of a part of the Missile Defence System in Turkey will cover a large swathe of the Russian Federation. Remember Washington's hysteria during the Cuban Missile Crisis?

What the West (USA/NATO) is capable of, we have seen very clearly. What we have not seen yet is what exists to counter this Axis of Evil.
Washington's position, smiling to the face yet wielding a knife behind the back, runs counter to the goodwill demonstrated by the Russian Federation when the Cold War ended and when political discourse centred on what the two former foes had in common, rather than differences. How is it possible to have anything in common with a back-stabbing, warmongering murderous group of criminals whose intention is to control the world's resources and whose modus operandi is closer to skulduggery through Colour Revolutions than it is to the norms of diplomacy?
The recent intrusion into the internal affairs of the Russian Federation, funding activists to create problems after the recent Parliamentary election (DUMA) and the insolence and arrogance demonstrated by Washington's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, leave it perfectly clear as to the measure of the monster we are facing.

There are, nevertheless, two powerful vectors working against Washington, vectors it has not yet begun to understand. One is the military might of the CSTO and SCO Organizations, covering the Russian Federation, the PR China and Central Asia, essentially defensive organizations, the former of which Iran could join as the first non-(ex) Soviet member.

The other is the collective willpower of humankind which is very much more in tandem with Moscow these days than with Washington, more and more exposed and isolated as a hypocrite and a pariah of the international community, associated more with torture and sodomy than with freedom and democracy, synonymous with massacres and intrusion, arrogance, belligerence, blackmail and bullying rather than with diplomacy, discussion and dialogue.

Moscow stands for the rule of law, Washington stands for breaching it. Moscow stands for world peace and brotherly relations, Washington stands for hegemony at any cost. It is imperative that the members of the world community stand together, close ranks and appeal to those inside the United States of America who stand for collective human values to make sure their leadership, apparently as near to a sinister clique of Satanists and Devil worshippers as it gets, do not manage to bring Armageddon down to Earth.

In the forthcoming election in the USA, the people have a choice to vet out those who pose a direct threat to the future of humankind by bringing foreign policy and clear commitments towards this, into the political agenda. One thing is certain: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are not fit to serve. They are a danger to their country, they are a danger to humankind.




Arms sales in the world continue to grow steadily from year to year. The world's leading exporters of arms and equipment have published their findings. Germany shows the most notable growth of arms supply in recent years, and the leading sellers of weapons in the world - the U.S. and Russia - are increasing their performance. In the current year Russia is to increase arms exports to nearly $10 billion in cash, which is $1 billion more than last year. The final result will be affected by the loss of markets in North Africa, particularly Libya. The contracts with this country would have allowed "Rosoboronexport" exceed the $10 billion mark.

http://english.pravda.ru/business/finance/09-12-2011/119904-arms_sales-0/





So, despite what CM thinks, there's no simple way to take the sticks away from people who have them...

[rforsythe]

Moscow stands for the rule of law, Washington stands for breaching it. Moscow stands for world peace and brotherly relations, Washington stands for hegemony at any cost.

While I'm not dismissing what Washington has done and does to this day, those sentiments on Moscow are f'n hilarious.

[RajunCajun]

The math you talk about is the same math that everyone else uses. That is the reason other nations have nuclear weapons, because the math is the same everywhere.

There is no way to prevent a determined country, group or person from creating a weapon of this type. Which if everyone has a bomb would make your big stick theory irrelevant. It only requires a few of these devices to destroy an enemy (one set off anywhere in the US would collapse our economy back to the 1890’s) and only take a few more than that to destroy the world.

The big stick idea only works if you are the only one with the big stick, and then for only a short amount of time before your neighbor ether gets a big stick themselves or sees you as a threat to the neighborhood and undermines you with all of the other neighbors.

The big stick policy leaves out that we are a part of the world economy. We are a global community now and can’t go back to living within the borders of the US. If 40 years of cold war has taught us anything, we are safer being interdependent on every other nation in the world than isolated with weapon painted at each other.

I don't really disagree with you. I also think that even though the weapons have gotten substantially more destructive, no much else has really changed. I think when it comes down to it, there will always be someone who wants to keep what they have and someone else who wants to take it from them. There are only so many ways to keep that from happening and almost all of them involve a threat of some unmatchable force. I’m not saying we should start nuking people, but as soon as “certain” other countries think we are too weak to deter their threats, they no longer become just threats.

[Ghost]

While I'm not dismissing what Washington has done and does to this day, those sentiments on Moscow are f'n hilarious.

In a way, I think their press is more amusing than ours.

[Ghost]

I don't really disagree with you. I also think that even though the weapons have gotten substantially more destructive, no much else has really changed. I think when it comes down to it, there will always be someone who wants to keep what they have and someone else who wants to take it from them. There are only so many ways to keep that from happening and almost all of them involve a threat of some unmatchable force. I’m not saying we should start nuking people, but as soon as “certain” other countries think we are too weak to deter their threats, they no longer become just threats.

Most modern theorists think--probably rightly--that the next nuclear attack won't be rained down from the sky, it'll be a dirty bomb or suitcase nuke smuggled into a country and detonated.

So, build all the missiles you want, build all the "Star Wars" defense systems you'd like, take whatever Deterrence stance you will, in the end, it won't matter.

And, once a suitcase nuke goes off, the attacked country can't just fire off it's arsenal in retaliation--there may not be a legitimate target. Remember, most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis, yet we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan instead. So, if a Saudi terrorist sets off a nuke, what good does our stockpile of weapons do?

Our arsenal may deter a nation like N. Korea from attacking us, but this isn't the Cold War anymore, things aren't so cut and dry, and ICBMs are not the only threat...

[RajunCajun]

Most modern theorists think--probably rightly--that the next nuclear attack won't be rained down from the sky, it'll be a dirty bomb or suitcase nuke smuggled into a country and detonated.

So, build all the missiles you want, build all the "Star Wars" defense systems you'd like, take whatever Deterrence stance you will, in the end, it won't matter.

And, once a suitcase nuke goes off, the attacked country can't just fire off it's arsenal in retaliation--there may not be a legitimate target. Remember, most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis, yet we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan instead. So, if a Saudi terrorist sets off a nuke, what good does our stockpile of weapons do?

Our arsenal may deter a nation like N. Korea from attacking us, but this isn't the Cold War anymore, things aren't so cut and dry, and ICBMs are not the only threat...

Very true, but when it comes down to it, it is fairly cut and dry as long as everyone is just talking, and everything is just a threat. That's just like trying to "persuade" someone not to start a bar fight. If the guys are pretty sure that they won’t make it out alive, they are less likely to throw the first punch. Once something actually happens, though, then all bets are off. Like you said...

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Duh, that's like locking the bank safe after it's been robbed. My point is, at the point in WWII when we bombed Japan, we had such a huge lead on the other nations, we could have ramped up production so fast that while Russia might be able to make 1 or 2, we would have a huge arsenal of them, AND the ICMB capability to launch them before they did. At that crucial point, we COULD and SHOULD have stepped up and told any aspirig country to ceas and desist or we'd flatten them. But no, we allowed them to build as big as stick as we had. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And, yes, I totally agree with 'Cajun on the biggest stick.

And, the point TOTALLY missed here by the liberals here in general was, I didn't propose the idea of bombing N. Korea, I merely pointed out the strategic point of it being a good time IF it was decided to while their COC was temporarily disrupted, and y'all just misinterpreted that and jumped on the bandwagon. Holy Knee-Jerk-Reactions Lib-man! :) Reading comprehension - FAIL! You guys crack me up.....but I just ran with it because it was fun. ;) ....and now, back to your regularly-scheduled drama.....

[Ghost]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h6pBGa5Avhs/TtQkGvmR2jI/AAAAAAAAFAs/WioqlSbtpaI/s1600/Blunt+Card+-+Reality.gif

Fixed.

[mdub]

all in all
"A Chance for North Koreans (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/21/opinion/a-chance-for-north-koreans.html?ref=kimjongun)

The rise of a relatively weak Kim Jong-un holds out hope for a better future for the country's 23 million citizens."
By JOHN LEE

[asp_125]

all in all
"A Chance for North Koreans (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/21/opinion/a-chance-for-north-koreans.html?ref=kimjongun)

The rise of a relatively weak Kim Jong-un holds out hope for a better future for the country's 23 million citizens."
By JOHN LEE

That's one side of the coin, the other is that a relatively young and inexperienced KJ-un will be a puppet leader - and the real power will be in the hands of old guard communist advisors and generals.

Guess time will tell.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Honestly, I hope his ill-begotten offspring will be a far more fair, and better leader for his country than ANY of his predeccessors were, and that he'll stop spending money on trying to kill all the S. Koreans and make sure his people are well-fed instead of starving them. Hell, maybe he'll even try and make peace with them......(but sadly I doubt it). Too bad we couldn't have stopped them before the country split into 2, with the communist side being the Evil Empire. Again, going back to stopping the Russians at the end of WWII before they became a nuclear world power, but I digress.....

[rforsythe]

Duh, that's like locking the bank safe after it's been robbed. My point is, at the point in WWII when we bombed Japan, we had such a huge lead on the other nations, we could have ramped up production so fast that while Russia might be able to make 1 or 2, we would have a huge arsenal of them, AND the ICMB capability to launch them before they did. At that crucial point, we COULD and SHOULD have stepped up and told any aspirig country to ceas and desist or we'd flatten them. But no, we allowed them to build as big as stick as we had. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And, yes, I totally agree with 'Cajun on the biggest stick.

And then what? We either follow through, glass the planet, and have zero chance of trade or diplomacy with anyone left -- turning us into an isolated country like North Korea. Or we can't quite sack up to killing millions of people and look weak, and other countries rise up against us. Bottom line, even if we had told Russia to stop, I don't think we'd have actually bombed them into submission and they know it too.

The problem with having the big stick, is that the only way to keep others from getting one too is to use it. We should all be pretty damn thankful that didn't happen.

[Clovis]

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g57/GeneralPig/b7076214316bc5866728fcbfff326d3e_wi.jpg

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

And then what? We either follow through, glass the planet, and have zero chance of trade or diplomacy with anyone left -- turning us into an isolated country like North Korea. Or we can't quite sack up to killing millions of people and look weak, and other countries rise up against us. Bottom line, even if we had told Russia to stop, I don't think we'd have actually bombed them into submission and they know it too.

The problem with having the big stick, is that the only way to keep others from getting one too is to use it. We should all be pretty damn thankful that didn't happen.
At that point, we wouldn't have HAD to glass the planet. Like i said, we could have ramped up so fast, they would have maybe 1, 2, and we'd have had dozens if not hundreds. We could have stopped russia and could have clamped down on the proliferation there and China, and formed alliances with select trusted countries to house but not OWN our nukes. They might be able to make a couple in secret, but not production. And, also, we could have stationed nukes in Japan, and Alaska, and kept missile cruisers off their coast, ensuring we could make sure anything they'd ever launch never made it over here. we were stupid, and now the world is going to pay the price, because now every tin-pot dictator is going to want, and most likely eventually GET, one or more. When a radical terrorist group gets one, we're target #1 besides maybe Israel. And even then I think we'd still be #1 because Israel contains land holy to the muslims.

And, it would have been better to have to use the big stick back then before Russia HAD any or maybe one or 2, then let them equal us and try and have to use it. Exploit any tactical advvantage immediately. Military strategy 101 my friend. ;)

[Snowman]

Science reality 101 my friend...

Nuclear Winter;
"A study presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December 2006 found that even a small-scale, regional nuclear war could disrupt the global climate for a decade or more. In a regional nuclear conflict scenario where two opposing nations in the subtropics would each use 50 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons (about 15 kiloton each) on major populated centers, the researchers estimated as much as five million tons of soot would be released, which would produce a cooling of several degrees over large areas of North America and Eurasia, including most of the grain-growing regions. The cooling would last for years, and according to the research could be "catastrophic"

[rforsythe]

Military strategy 101 my friend. ;)

Go back and take it again.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Science reality 101 my friend...

Nuclear Winter;
"A study presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December 2006 found that even a small-scale, regional nuclear war could disrupt the global climate for a decade or more. In a regional nuclear conflict scenario where two opposing nations in the subtropics would each use 50 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons (about 15 kiloton each) on major populated centers, the researchers estimated as much as five million tons of soot would be released, which would produce a cooling of several degrees over large areas of North America and Eurasia, including most of the grain-growing regions. The cooling would last for years, and according to the research could be "catastrophic"Just the thing to counteract the "Global Warming Theory" the Gore-Bot and the rest of you libs have been pushing on the world for years now!:lol::p

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Go back and take it again.
Why? I'd just be rehashing what I already know from working for the military for only about 14 years?

[Snowman]

Yet another reason the term Military Intelligence is an oxymoron...

[mdub]

Yet another reason the term Military Intelligence is an oxymoron...


funny....and those guys are so high and mighty...i knew a person in MI....he was funny..Its all hush hush......He says yeah man don't tell anyone but the Brigade Commander likes liquid cream with his coffee.....sshhh.....

[Ghost]

Yet another reason the term Military Intelligence is an oxymoron...

"Working for" does not imply graduating from West Point.

Hitler was in WWI, and we saw how the brilliance of his strategic military mind won WW II for him...oh...wait...

[CaptGoodvibes]

I have a friend in MI. He has a towering intellect and a hilarious sense of humor. He's, by far, the most intelligent person I've ever known. Jeff knows who I'm talking about.

[Ghost]

I have a friend in MI. He has a towering intellect and a hilarious sense of humor. He's, by far, the most intelligent person I've ever known. Jeff knows who I'm talking about.

Ask him what he thinks of Private Monkey's "plan" and its chances for success vs chances for ending the world.

[Nick_Ninja]

C_M thinks he's WINNING :D

[Ghost]

C_M thinks he's WINNING :D

I wonder what color the sky is in his world?

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

I wonder what color the sky is in his world?
Bright red with flames and a couple big mushroom-looking thingy's off in the distance....... :)

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

"Working for" does not imply graduating from West Point.

Hitler was in WWI, and we saw how the brilliance of his strategic military mind won WW II for him...oh...wait...
No, but my X gf's father was a captain in the Navy for many years, an extremely intelligent man, with numerous degrees, a veteran of the Korean war (was shot down), and his son, a friend, is in MI specializing in russian affairs (speaks fluent Russian) and has probably made Admiral by now. All the talks I had with them and having spend many years working specifically on the design of long and short-range missiles, yeah, I probably know more about the military and strategy than most. ;)

Hitler wwas an idiot, the military strategy of his commanders was often brilliant, Hitler's, far less so. And, the germans could have won WWII if they'd have consolidated their conquests, ensured a solid supply chain, and then advanced again, instead of fighting far too many fronts at once. That, and attacking Russia at the wrong time in the winter. Also, if Hitler had pursued their nuclear program like he SHOULD have done if he'd listened to his underlings, we'd be speaking German now. Thanksfully, he DIDN'T, and let his crazy ego make him force his commanders to follow his stupid strategy. Look at all the advanced weaponry Geremany had that was far beyond us at the time. Like my friend, a history major said: We beat the Germans only by bombarding them with shit". In other words, they had better, more sophisticated weaponry, but we had a much greater manufacturing capability, and we could build things faster than they could destroy them.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Ask him what he thinks of Private Monkey's "plan" and its chances for success vs chances for ending the world.
If anything it'd be a limited exchange, not WWIII. None of the superpowers would risk MAD over that pissant little shithole.