North Korea attacks South Korea, South retaliates

[ghitch75]

Sry for the thread hi-jack but why is that?
"sucked" off the deck?

Due to the pressured/flow of blast created by the barrels? Noise wave? ????

the blast wave is leavin' from the round's.......i guess i should have said blowen....

 

[nate1865]

Wow.

I'm surprised at how often those that have excelled (admirably) at specific tactical functions of warfare believe they cannot be questioned as to the prudence of large international war strategies.

There's a reason Carlos Hathcock had his role and Eisenhower had his.

The real tragedy is the geographic cult controlled by Kim Jong-Il. That place is scary and those people need liberated from their oppression. Trouble is that their population has been so brainwashed by its leadership they can't see the truth about their "Dear Leader" and enable their own prison. It's a very sad situation.

 

[Zimm1001]

"We are not here to fight...We are here to win!" Horatio Hornblower

 

[machete]

This fight aint none of our concern,,, We cant win this,,,and we can lose pretty bad...

They already shot off a missile in LA harbor to tell us to back off... They can easily drive up to Seattle and shoot one off there. We aint got no way to stop a missile with a ten minute flight time...

Heres the thing folks,,,if a missile hits a us city,,,our way of life ends immediately... Our government has one job above all...keep foreign armies off our shores...and if they cant do even that,,,they got no claim to power and everyone will ignore them,,,then this all falls apart...and I mean quick!!!

Were so busy overseas we aint paying attention to the front yard...I dont care about some habibibob province in the middle of nowhere...I do care about a north Korean missile going off above Hollywood...

We need to get our boys out of there...pronto!!! We dont need to get involved in this any more...I wont trade a major US city with millions of US lives for the entire korean peninsula...you can bank on that...

This aint our business...period!!! Leave it to the Koreans to settle this among themselves...

 

[smitty12b]

[quote
The real tragedy is the geographic cult controlled by Kim Jong-Il. That place is scary and those people need liberated from their oppression. Trouble is that their population has been so brainwashed by its leadership they can't see the truth about their "Dear Leader" and enable their own prison. It's a very sad situation. [/quote]

+1 for this^ I don't think mass liberation is even possible. If you take out Kimmy then the military takes over and the people loose all hope because "their god" is dead. It will takes many more generations to make a change.
Maybe we should send them obama, he's good at making change

 

[Joe Williams]

This is your opinion and you are free to think it but your statement does makes me sad. It show that the american people are at best, spoiled. A little inconvenience and the sky is falling, our rights are being ripped from our hands.
Please explain to me what rights you have lost due to terrorism? and how the 2nd Amendment will help you with an IED? I am fairly sure our troops have much better weapons than we and yet they are affected every day

Well, can't fly commericial to Disneyland without having my family's 4th Amendment rights stripped away, and risking having my wife and/or son sexually assaulted.

 

[junglerogue]

Here's a liveleak link to footage in SK. What a great move on NK's part, especially considering our current political stance of "We should be more modest in our belief that we can impose democracy on a country through military force. In the past, it has been movements for freedom from within tyrannical regimes that have led to flourishing democracies; movements that continue today. " -BARACK OBAMA, speech, Nov. 20, 2006
They (NK) know full well we're "legitimizing" our country to the world.

 

[machete]

I will once again, for the proof, state what you said. You desire to push aside political discourse and use the military without the consent of the people to perform acts of violence upon others.

Does diplomacy win? Yes, and it has on many occasions. Do warriors win? Yes, once again, on many occasions. But for warriors to percieve something as being a loss and then suggest "pushing aside" those who aren't winning (in context of your statement, the politicos) and "do the job yourself". What about that is not a clear cut description of a military coup or junta?

I am not trying to "prove someone wrong", I am trying to understand the chest thumping, "kill them all" mindset I see of quite a few online here. A warrior's job is to protect the nation. A politico's job is to represent the nation and command the military to protect the nation and it's interests. The military does not command the politicos and perform it's own actions. I am confused why so many here wish to cause such a horrible ill upon others who meerly want to exist but are forced into such a horrible situation by their unelected, undesired and fear mongering leaders as in the case of NK?

AWESOME!!!!!!

 

[dross]

Don't you folks worry 'bout a thing. Obama will diplomacy NK right straight into good behavior.

 

[nate1865]

If you take out Kimmy then the military takes over and the people loose all hope because "their god" is dead. It will takes many more generations to make a change.

It is only a matter of time before a self-imposed demi-god gets enough hubris to make their move.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQXfMMHV8FM"]YouTube - National Geographic Inside Undercover In North Korea 1/5[/ame]

What is at war with us is this deadly ideology.

Edit: I completely forgot the quote and am a newb with the smiley icons - my bad

 

[smitty12b]

Well, can't fly commericial to Disneyland without having my family's 4th Amendment rights stripped away, and risking having my wife and/or son sexually assaulted.

So your wife will be raped and your son will be sodomized if you fly? using the term " sexually assaulted" is a bit over the top and very insulting to anyone who has actually been a real victim of assault. Maybe you should go to a victims support group and say that crap, I am sure that a real victim would appreciate it.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Considering the current state of the world, a pat down doesn't seem that unreasonable

 

[CarmelHP]

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Considering the current state of the world, a pat down doesn't seem that unreasonable

It's not a pat down. That's the point, it's invasive. I'm persuaded that any search that requires you to either submit to irradiation or having your genitals fondled without any other indicator or criminal conduct is inherently unreasonable.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

So your wife will be raped and your son will be sodomized if you fly? using the term " sexually assaulted" is a bit over the top and very insulting to anyone who has actually been a real victim of assault. Maybe you should go to a victims support group and say that crap, I am sure that a real victim would appreciate it.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Considering the current state of the world, a pat down doesn't seem that unreasonable

You're probably going to get smacked for that Smitty. I'll explain the difference.

The 4th Amendment guarantees a personal freedom from unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant in the absence of exigent circumstances. Personal. Saying that you are stripping everyone of their right is no less an affront to the Constitution.

On the other hand, you are not required to submit to a search. You don't have to fly. If you do not fly, you are not subject to search.

But there are two issues. First, this starts a slippery slope. Next it will be federal buildings to protect the workers. Then it will be malls to protect the occupants. Your employment. Everywhere you go someone could demand a patdown search, which in reality is a sexual assault. Statute supports that definition, whether you agree or not.

Second, there is no evidence there is an overwhelming government interest to violate or limit the 4th Amendment right to be secure in yourself, your papers, and your property.

NO ONE puts their hands on me unless I deserve it. It's a health risk. I'll avoid airports until this silly rule falls into the "man that was a dumb idea" file.

 

[nate1865]

I am confused why so many here wish to cause such a horrible ill upon others who meerly want to exist but are forced into such a horrible situation by their unelected, undesired and fear mongering leaders as in the case of NK?

While I agree with avoiding chest-thumping, kill them all mentality - I think you're misreading the people of NK.

They worship their leader. Literally. They are taught to hate the US as part of their belief system. They cannot show allegience to any other above the "Dear Leader" - it is a forcefully-imposed, man-based religion. Just because we see it that way doesn't mean they do. It takes more than just one man or a select few to enforce that belief system.

They don't necessarily think like you and I. Most have (for right or wrong ways) been made to think the US is the enemy, so they operate from that belief framework. The US, its allies, and values are the enemy.

In America we still have a lot of fundamental ideas about "the American dream", "freedom" and what makes our culture different that we bake into our perspective. Many nations on that side of the globe have very different belief frameworks we have a hard time getting our heads around because we take our culture for granted.

 

[Compatriot G]

One thing I think may have been forgotten. Technically, we are still in state of conflict with North Korea. We have only had a cease-fire since 1953.

 

[Love the 1911]

You're probably going to get smacked for that Smitty. I'll explain the difference.

The 4th Amendment guarantees a personal freedom from unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant in the absence of exigent circumstances. Personal. Saying that you are stripping everyone of their right is no less an affront to the Constitution.

On the other hand, you are not required to submit to a search. You don't have to fly. If you do not fly, you are not subject to search.

But there are two issues. First, this starts a slippery slope. Next it will be federal buildings to protect the workers. Then it will be malls to protect the occupants. Your employment. Everywhere you go someone could demand a patdown search, which in reality is a sexual assault. Statute supports that definition, whether you agree or not.

Second, there is no evidence there is an overwhelming government interest to violate or limit the 4th Amendment right to be secure in yourself, your papers, and your property.

NO ONE puts their hands on me unless I deserve it. It's a health risk. I'll avoid airports until this silly rule falls into the "man that was a dumb idea" file.

Well said, except for paragraph 3. As you said, flying is a privilege/luxury, not a right. Shopping at a privately owned store or entering my house is the same (I won't assault you, sexually or otherwise). That being said, it is also a privilege for a private company to receive my hard-earned money. Make my shopping experience any more difficult than I feel it needs to be (Wal-Mart) and I take my money elsewhere.

When this type of search starts coming up in government buildings where law-abiding citizens are required to go to receive necessary documents for marriage, protective orders, etc. and I will be right with everyone else that demands change. As for now, if some dude feels the need to stare at my junk through the scanner, I will weigh time saved vs my feelings of inadequacy if they point and laugh.

Edit: I should have read the original thread instead of going along with the thread-jack going on. This is a good discussion but probably belongs elsewhere.

 

[rambone]

This is your opinion and you are free to think it but your statement does makes me sad. It show that the american people are at best, spoiled. A little inconvenience and the sky is falling, our rights are being ripped from our hands.
Please explain to me what rights you have lost due to terrorism? and how the 2nd Amendment will help you with an IED? I am fairly sure our troops have much better weapons than we and yet they are affected every day

Wanting to take care of ourselves is spoiled? Wanting LESS government is spoiled? Wanting my rights intact is spoiled? Really??!

Do I really have to elaborate about all the intrusions on our liberty, rights, and privacy? I guess I do. Let's see. Several trillion dollars that I will have to be taxed to pay back. There are cameras hanging all over the place in public. The government has seized the authority to just tap my phone any time they feel like it. Americans are being forced to get x-rays and mammograms just to go on vacation. It has been ruled that police can plant a tracking device on our vehicles while they sit in our driveways and they can watch our every movement. There is a secret "no-fly" list that people can end up on for any arbitrary reason, and be viewed as a terror suspect for the rest of their lives and treated as such - no judge, no jury, no appeal. The Department of Homeland Security issues official reports that say returning veterans, NRA members, militia enthusiasts, and pro-lifers should all be watched as potential terrorists. We've got bills coming through congress to control the internet in order to protect us from "cyber-terror." We have government websites encouraging us to report our neighbors to the government if they act "suspicious" or make "fishy comments." And let's not forget the numerous Federal Emergency Management Agency internment camps that pepper the nation, sitting vacant, waiting for the so-called emergency to be filled up with U.S. Citizens.

Look, there is a fine line between protecting our liberty and taking our liberty. Total safety will never be achievable, and it doesn't even sound appealing. I want freedom, and less government. No, I don't want hundreds more little "inconveniences" that the Feds want to impose on me. Does that make me a spoiled brat or a patriot? Are you fighting for freedom, or for a cozy web of government [strike]control[/strike] protections?

The Hate America First fire burns on both sides of the candle. Those that have never had to defend freedom scream the loudest for it. And from it. Sad indeed.

Wow. There is a distinct difference between loving your country and loving your government. If I scream the loudest for freedom then I will take what you said as a compliment. There is nothing sad about it. I know that I don't have to be on the government payroll to love America. Somebody once said, "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." He didn't get famous for taking orders from King George.

 

[smitty12b]

You're probably going to get smacked for that Smitty. I'll explain the difference.

The 4th Amendment guarantees a personal freedom from unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant in the absence of exigent circumstances. Personal. Saying that you are stripping everyone of their right is no less an affront to the Constitution.

On the other hand, you are not required to submit to a search. You don't have to fly. If you do not fly, you are not subject to search.

But there are two issues. First, this starts a slippery slope. Next it will be federal buildings to protect the workers. Then it will be malls to protect the occupants. Your employment. Everywhere you go someone could demand a patdown search, which in reality is a sexual assault. Statute supports that definition, whether you agree or not.

Second, there is no evidence there is an overwhelming government interest to violate or limit the 4th Amendment right to be secure in yourself, your papers, and your property.

NO ONE puts their hands on me unless I deserve it. It's a health risk. I'll avoid airports until this silly rule falls into the "man that was a dumb idea" file.

I agree and I like to be smacked(had to say that) I guess to me it doesn't seem unreasonable JMHO

Which side of the story is right? i'll give up some personal freedom for safety or I don't think it will happen and don't touch my freedom? both sides of the argument are based on fear.

 

[Phil502]

In case it missed your notice in history class, McArthur couldn't get the job done. It wasn't a matter of politics, either. It was a matter of man vs. man and the Chinese and NK's had a decided advantage in that area. The NK's still do. Folks who think that going to war on the peninsula is some kind of good idea need to seriously rethink their position. Especially, if they aren't going to be fighting.

I am not sure that is exactly correct. Macarthur came up with the big left hook amphibious assault, that got us back to the 38TH parallel after that Truman though Macarthur was overreaching his authority and canned him. I don't know if we were ready to take on the Chinese right then but maybe it was possible. One can only speculate.

 

[teddy12b]

Bottom line, if people know getting touched in the junk is off limits, then that's where they're going to hide something. I really don't think the people wake up just wanting to "inspect" people. That job would be awful considering we're not exactly a nation of supermodels.