Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Stealth bombers sent to S. Korea


  • Please log in to reply
344 replies to this topic

#76    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,755 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:33 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 28 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

I am not saying NK is not the aggressor here tbh. Im saying we are doing nothing to deter there aggression. We are playing Cold War with them. See the difference.

Ahh, K. I may have thought you were completely on Coffeys side (ie: the side where NK is the aggressor --- but only because the US forces them to be ).

I disagree with your stance. I think that the USs actions are deterring NK aggression. If not for the US, I do believe the North would have invaded long ago.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#77    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 12,628 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:33 PM

View PostThe Skater Boy, on 28 March 2013 - 03:30 PM, said:

Well there's nothing stopping us disarming these nations and then disarming ourselves and THEN policing the world, no? What makes us the "good guys" in this? Why do we get to have these weapons and then pick and choose who else can have them?

Thank you for the history lesson, indeed people died so I could live in a world of freedom and fairness. Again, do you have a problem with me taking a liberal outlook on the world? I'll assume you're a republican, what a great job George Bush did at making the world a better place.

Obama is asking for a war and frankly I'm tired of them, always because we stick our noses in where it doesn't belong. Enough people have died in the past decade because of pointless wars over who has the biggest toys.
First -NO I do not have a problem with your political leaning.  Second, I apologise for being snarky about the freedom issue (it's a pet peeve of mine) but I have no excuse, it was rude.  As to choosing the good from the bad... I think the issue is way past that.  These weapons will never be truly removed unless we either destroy ourselves with them OR a "limited" nuclear exchange happens that scares and shocks the world SO MUCH that we have a moment of clarity as a species and do the right thing.  It just isn't human nature to trust the other guy.  We have proven it over and over.  If that sounds like a cynical outlook then so be it I guess.  In my 52 years I haven't seen much of a reason to think otherwise...yet...
BTW - I think we are ALL tired of the wars.   :yes:

  Imagination is the power in the turn of a phrase.

#78    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,755 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:35 PM

View PostYamato, on 28 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

60 years ago?  Time to start blaming North Korea for that now?   That's not what this news story is about.  They're both armed at the border, pointing their guns at each other.  I have friends who served on that border, the most militarized border on the planet.   I have no reason to think any more highly of South Korea than most any other country in the world.   They're not worth a dime of taxpayer money like every other country out there that might get a label for how we're supposed to treat them and who we're supposed to blame.   SK is about 10x more powerful than NK too, they can defend themselves.  It's pretty pathetic that they couldn't resolve their differences in this many years though.   We can find much better "allies" than that.

No, not 60 years ago. Currently. Its not that they're just armed at the border... NK has nukes on the border, and have threatened to use their forces on Seoul and the US.

And I disagree with your statement that SK is 10x more powerful than NK. What do you use to justify this statement?

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#79    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:39 PM

Quote

I disagree with your stance. I think that the USs actions are deterring NK aggression. If not for the US, I do believe the North would have invaded long ago.

You were around for itleast part of the Cold War werent you ? Did you ever do duck and cover drills in school ? I did. This is the same posturing we did with the Soviet Union. Its called one upsmanship. NK is a different beast then the Soviet Union was however as they cannot destroy the world 300 times over alone. So all were doing is egging them into a conventional war again or a fast nuclear exchange.

I mean really those are the consequences for getting this wrong. I hope we get it right.


#80    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 12,628 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:39 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 28 March 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

These the same bombers or are we sticking our stick in the hornets nest some more. Who up at the top is getting there jollies at provoking NK should be dragged out and shot. This is not diplomacy nor a detterent to them.


There is another side to these moves though.  Remember Saddam's adventure into Kuwait in '91?  He said later that he made his move because he thought Bush was giving him a green light by NOT telling him specifically he couldn't invade.  So if no answer is made to these provocations and they continue to ratchet up, that can be just as dangerous.  The REAL issue here is a miscalculation and lets face it, the North doesn't live on the same planet as the rest of us.
Edit to add - these are B-2 bombers.  They come and go without being seen.  The only indication the North will have that they have been there is the exploding buildings, airfield, ships, troops... you get the idea...  AND the generals in the North KNOW this.  The B-52's are old and slow and very visible from a long way off to radar.

Edited by and then, 28 March 2013 - 07:41 PM.

  Imagination is the power in the turn of a phrase.

#81    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:42 PM

Im trying to recall us using B-2's for "exercises" in the past. The B-2 is a first strike weapon and not a "bomber" as is being reported. Its a stealth bomber. They carry tactical munitions. Very tactical. B-52's are the carpet bombers.


#82    Stellar

Stellar

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,755 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male

  • The objective of war is not to die for your country. It's to make the other son of a b**** die for his!
    -Patton

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:45 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 28 March 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

You were around for itleast part of the Cold War werent you ? Did you ever do duck and cover drills in school ? I did. This is the same posturing we did with the Soviet Union. Its called one upsmanship. NK is a different beast then the Soviet Union was however as they cannot destroy the world 300 times over alone. So all were doing is egging them into a conventional war again or a fast nuclear exchange.

I mean really those are the consequences for getting this wrong. I hope we get it right.

Those are the consequences for getting things wrong, yet--- but it seems we disagree on what the "right" thing is. You say what the US is doing is wrong, I say that not doing what the US is doing is wrong. History will tell which one of us is right.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent."

----Seraphina

#83    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 12,628 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:51 PM

View PostStellar, on 28 March 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

No, not 60 years ago. Currently. Its not that they're just armed at the border... NK has nukes on the border, and have threatened to use their forces on Seoul and the US.

And I disagree with your statement that SK is 10x more powerful than NK. What do you use to justify this statement?
The south would be devastated by the north in an attack.  Seoul would be a ruin within days unless the US nuked the north.  Since that isn't going to happen unless the north nukes first, Seoul is going to be expendable.  The casualties would be horrific and so would be the economic damage to the region and maybe the world.  And Fat-boy knows this and it's why he keeps pushing.  He wants more goodies from his favorite uncle.  Screw him and the horse he rode in on!  Let China feed their client and leave the rest of us out of it.  I don't think China will allow the situation to get too out of hand before they'd "handle" him themselves.  They have too much to lose.

  Imagination is the power in the turn of a phrase.

#84    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:51 PM

Looking at the big picture put together we moved our B-2's to Germany I believe for the Gulf War2. I think this "exercise" is a veiled redeployment to the region as this is the second wave thats been sent over there and we have bases all over the region that can support them.

What I dont understand is why were advertising it. Thats the aggression part I dont like.


#85    CrimsonKing

CrimsonKing

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DarkSide of TheMoon

  • "It does not require a majority to prevail,but rather an irate,tireless minority keen to set brushfires in peoples minds" Sam Adams

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:52 PM

View PostYamato, on 28 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

60 years ago?  Time to start blaming North Korea for that now?   That's not what this news story is about.  They're both armed at the border, pointing their guns at each other.  I have friends who served on that border, the most militarized border on the planet.   I have no reason to think any more highly of South Korea than most any other country in the world.   They're not worth a dime of taxpayer money like every other country out there that might get a label for how we're supposed to treat them and who we're supposed to blame.   SK is about 10x more powerful than NK too, they can defend themselves.  It's pretty pathetic that they couldn't resolve their differences in this many years though.   We can find much better "allies" than that.

Honestly NK has enough artillery and troops to put a hurt on anyone,moreso a close neighbor.I just do not want another war where nothing is gained and only lives lost.

"If it is not advantageous,do not move.If objectives can not be attained,do not employ the army.Unless endangered do not engage in warfare.The ruler cannot mobilize the army out of personal anger.The general can not engage in battle because of personal frustration.When it is advantageous,move;when not advantageous,stop.Anger can revert to happiness,annoyance can revert to joy,but a vanquished state cannot be revived,the dead cannot be brought back to life." Sun-Tzu

#86    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:54 PM

Quote

And Fat-boy knows this and it's why he keeps pushing.  He wants more goodies from his favorite uncle.  Screw him and the horse he rode in on!  Let China feed their client and leave the rest of us out of it.  I don't think China will allow the situation to get too out of hand before they'd "handle" him themselves.  They have too much to lose.

I would think B-2's in the region would make China react period. Nuclear capable, stealth bombers are every countries biggest fear. Not even China has a defense to them Im aware of. Theyd want that crap out of the region and said nothing the other day about it. It makes one wonder.

Theres a reason ALL B-2's are kept in the USA.

Edited by AsteroidX, 28 March 2013 - 07:54 PM.


#87    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 12,628 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 28 March 2013 - 07:57 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 28 March 2013 - 07:54 PM, said:

I would think B-2's in the region would make China react period. Nuclear capable, stealth bombers are every countries biggest fear. Not even China has a defense to them Im aware of. Theyd want that crap out of the region and said nothing the other day about it. It makes one wonder.

Theres a reason ALL B-2's are kept in the USA.
Yes, the B-2 certainly is an eye opener for an adversary but I think (and hope) the reaction from China will be to rein in Mr Un.  The Chinese have to know that it's a big time lose lose for them if war starts there.

  Imagination is the power in the turn of a phrase.

#88    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,931 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 28 March 2013 - 08:10 PM

View PostYamato, on 28 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

60 years ago?  Time to start blaming North Korea for that now?   That's not what this news story is about.  They're both armed at the border, pointing their guns at each other.  I have friends who served on that border, the most militarized border on the planet.   I have no reason to think any more highly of South Korea than most any other country in the world.   They're not worth a dime of taxpayer money like every other country out there that might get a label for how we're supposed to treat them and who we're supposed to blame.   SK is about 10x more powerful than NK too, they can defend themselves.  It's pretty pathetic that they couldn't resolve their differences in this many years though.   We can find much better "allies" than that.

South Korea has tried to resolve their differences. They've tried a few times. They just elected a president who wants to try and improve tries. Even now South Koreans are helping to manage factories that help the NK economy. North Korea however has no interest in improving relations and have gone out of their way to cause trouble. They are the pathetic ones in this situation.


View PostAsteroidX, on 28 March 2013 - 07:42 PM, said:

Im trying to recall us using B-2's for "exercises" in the past. The B-2 is a first strike weapon and not a "bomber" as is being reported. Its a stealth bomber. They carry tactical munitions. Very tactical. B-52's are the carpet bombers.

Another article I've read said that it is possible that the bombers have been used before and this is the first time it's being mentioned because North Korea is throwing around a lot more threats than normal.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#89    SurgeTechnologies

SurgeTechnologies

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,217 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Not disclosed

  • "Why not take what seems to me the only chance of escaping what is otherwise the sure destruction"

Posted 28 March 2013 - 08:10 PM

Dont ever underestimate the power of others. China might have more powerfull army than most people here think.

" Technology has exceeded our humanity. "

#90    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,044 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 28 March 2013 - 08:21 PM

View PostYamato, on 28 March 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

60 years ago?  Time to start blaming North Korea for that now?   That's not what this news story is about.  They're both armed at the border, pointing their guns at each other.  I have friends who served on that border, the most militarized border on the planet.   I have no reason to think any more highly of South Korea than most any other country in the world.   They're not worth a dime of taxpayer money like every other country out there that might get a label for how we're supposed to treat them and who we're supposed to blame.   SK is about 10x more powerful than NK too, they can defend themselves.  It's pretty pathetic that they couldn't resolve their differences in this many years though.   We can find much better "allies" than that.

SK may be Technologically more advance but NK outnumbers them 4 to 1. If war where to happen the North would probably overrun much of hte south before they are slowed. It would be Air Power that would turn the tide but only at the cost of millions of lives.

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users