Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Calamari

Mike Pence doesn't stand for Korea, skips meal with North Koreans

153 posts in this topic

5 hours ago, Manny said:

Who cares what you people think? 

Posts like this and you have the nerve to whine when someone dares to stand up to your bullying and nonsense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JoyinMudville said:

East Germany was part of the Warsaw Pact which had tens of thousands of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons that could have obliterated England and France in a matter of ten minutes. And yes, the nukes were stationed in East Germany.

 

Why are you so scared of this little tin pot dictator? Do you really think the South Korean population would just roll over and say, yeah, let's live under the North's regime which can't even figure out how to keep the lights on.

Something really sad has happened to right. You all seem to have lost the innate confidence in the superiority of the American system that was so powerfully articulated by Reagan.

I am not scared of him.  But he is crazy, murders his own relatives, and maybe allowing thermonuclear tipped ICBMs under his control is not a good idea.  

And if the South is not going to roll over, what makes you think Kim will?  

And you seem to forget that Reagan conducted a large military buildup including missile defense systems and labeled the Soviet Union the Evil Empire.  That was the superiority of the American system.  He demanded that Gorby, "Tear down this wall."  (I have a tiny piece of it.)  The Cold War was not won by sunshine, but the confidence was there as it is now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jdsample said:

I am not scared of him.  But he is crazy, murders his own relatives, and maybe allowing thermonuclear tipped ICBMs under his control is not a good idea.  

And if the South is not going to roll over, what makes you think Kim will?  

And you seem to forget that Reagan conducted a large military buildup including missile defense systems and labeled the Soviet Union the Evil Empire.  That was the superiority of the American system.  He demanded that Gorby, "Tear down this wall."  (I have a tiny piece of it.)  The Cold War was not won by sunshine, but the confidence was there as it is now.  

It also wasn't won by pointless bluster and making up grade-school nicknames for people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

It also wasn't won by pointless bluster and making up grade-school nicknames for people

Evil Empire?  Perhaps you were too young.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jdsample said:

Evil Empire?  Perhaps you were too young.  

People who say 'Reagan won the Cold War' or attribute the end of the cold war to the Reagan defense buildup (which actually began under Carter in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan) are grossly simplifying the causes that led to the demise of the U.S.S.R.

For instance...

Quote

From the mid-1970s to the eve of Gorbachev's assumption of party leadership in the spring of 1985, the CIA portrayed a Soviet Union plagued by a deteriorating economy and intensifying societal problems. CIA products described the growing political tensions resulting from these failures, the prospect that sooner or later a Soviet leadership would be forced to confront these issues, and the uncertainty over what form this confrontation would take.

From the late 1970s through the early 1980s, CIA produced several papers addressing the prospects for "serious economic and political problems" arising from the combined effect of growing consumer discontent, ethnic divisions, a corrupt and incompetent political system, and widespread cynicism among a populace for whom the system had failed to deliver on its promises. (Appendix A, references 7 and 8 and 10-13). One of these papers, for example, described the problems stemming from "long continued investment priorities favoring heavy industry and defense, coupled with a rigid and cumbersome system of economic organization" which "have combined to produce a consumer sector that not only lags behind both the West and Eastern Europe, but also is in many ways primitive, grossly unbalanced, and in massive disequilibrium":

  • These products portrayed a Soviet leadership caught in a descending spiral: declining productivity was depressing the economy, which aggravated the cynicism and alienation of the populace; this in turn further reduced productivity. 
  • CIA concluded that this "vicious circle" was potentially more significant for the 1980s than "anything the regime has had to cope with in the past three decades," and that the leadership and elites were fully aware they confronted major problems. 
  • The analyses repeated the judgment that the Brezhnev regime and the Andropov/Chernyenko successions were likely to rely on the traditional Soviet instruments for controlling unrest and imposing "discipline," but that such approaches would not hold for the longer term in the face of a Soviet populace that was becoming less pliable and more demanding.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/soviet.html

Reagan deserves credit for standing strong against a Soviet Union that was rotting from within but any discussion of the collapse of the USSR that doesn't include the impact of Afghanistan and the Chernobyl meltdown on the State's credibility is incomplete. Ultimately, Lech Walenza is the catalyst that led directly to the demise of the Warsaw Pact. The affect of JP II's visit to Poland should also not be underestimated.

 

But... back to the topic at hand. South Korea is a U.S. success story like almost no other. The North Korean regime's days are numbered. It's a shame we don't currently have a steady hand at the tiller. It's also a shame that Trump doesn't bother read intelligence or history because he lacks the historical perspective to steer an effective strategy in this area.

Edited by JoyinMudville

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2018 at 5:14 PM, Dinglehopper said:

I would bet better than your trolling works out for you.

I would bet that  your misguided hero will still be unemployed in the NFL next year. Unlike you, smart owners realized that alienating more than 50% of their fan base by bringing in a quarterback whose lack of skills , and hatred of his own team’s fan base, was the reason he was benched, for a mediocre replacement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, JoyinMudville said:

People who say 'Reagan won the Cold War' or attribute the end of the cold war to the Reagan defense buildup (which actually began under Carter in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan) are grossly simplifying the causes that led to the demise of the U.S.S.R.

For instance...

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/soviet.html

Reagan deserves credit for standing strong against a Soviet Union that was rotting from within but any discussion of the collapse of the USSR that doesn't include the impact of Afghanistan and the Chernobyl meltdown on the State's credibility is incomplete. Ultimately, Lech Walenza is the catalyst that led directly to the demise of the Warsaw Pact. The affect of JP II's visit to Poland should also not be underestimated.

 

But... back to the topic at hand. South Korea is a U.S. success story like almost no other. The North Korean regime's days are numbered. It's a shame we don't currently have a steady hand at the tiller. It's also a shame that Trump doesn't bother read intelligence or history because he lacks the historical perspective to steer an effective strategy in this area.

The ending of the cold war had far more to do with Gorbachev and his program of Glasnot and Perestroika than anything Ronnie Reagan and Maggie Thatcher came up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, WKDWZD said:

The ending of the cold war had far more to do with Gorbachev and his program of Glasnot and Perestroika than anything Ronnie Reagan and Maggie Thatcher came up with.

Yes, and Glasnost and Perestroika, combined, was a last ditch effort to placate a restless population tired of the lies and the underperformance of the Soviet economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, volperdinger said:

I would bet that  your misguided hero will still be unemployed in the NFL next year. Unlike you, smart owners realized that alienating more than 50% of their fan base by bringing in a quarterback whose lack of skills , and hatred of his own team’s fan base, was the reason he was benched, for a mediocre replacement. 

I could care less about Kap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JoyinMudville said:

People who say 'Reagan won the Cold War' or attribute the end of the cold war to the Reagan defense buildup (which actually began under Carter in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan) are grossly simplifying the causes that led to the demise of the U.S.S.R.

For instance...

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/97unclass/soviet.html

Reagan deserves credit for standing strong against a Soviet Union that was rotting from within but any discussion of the collapse of the USSR that doesn't include the impact of Afghanistan and the Chernobyl meltdown on the State's credibility is incomplete. Ultimately, Lech Walenza is the catalyst that led directly to the demise of the Warsaw Pact. The affect of JP II's visit to Poland should also not be underestimated.

 

But... back to the topic at hand. South Korea is a U.S. success story like almost no other. The North Korean regime's days are numbered. It's a shame we don't currently have a steady hand at the tiller. It's also a shame that Trump doesn't bother read intelligence or history because he lacks the historical perspective to steer an effective strategy in this area.

I think you make a bunch of good points.  Socialism always rots from within at some point.  Afghanistan was very significant and the US under Reagan played a big part in arming the same guys who ironically turned into terrorists later.  I don't think Chernobyl was anything more than a black eye.  They had to abandon a town and lost face with the world.  Fukajima was probably worse, but arguably not purely human error.  

There were a couple of Lech Walensa's in the history of the Soviet empire.   But with every uprising Soviet tanks steam rolled the freedom movement.  The Soviets could have done that to Poland, but by then they were outclassed militarily and their status in the world was so diminished that rolling tanks through Warsaw would not have been in their interest.  Walensa was less a catalyst than the straw that broke the camel's back.  Soviets were in collapse for many reasons, but staunch US opposition was pretty damn important.  WIthout the US, they would have been the dominant power in the world.  They could have had their way in Poland, Afghanistan, etc.  

I agree with you on South Korea.  Also with North Korea if the world maintains its sanctions and isolates them.  Unfortunately for a number of decades they have been supported by many nations including the US in exchange for moderating bellicosity.  Are North Korea's days numbered?  Not if the world feeds them in exchange for not starting wars.  But if their days are numbered what will Kim & Company do when it seems inevitable that they will be executed or hung by his own people.  At that point a red button labeled "San Francisco" gets a little scary.  This is a problem that a bunch of presidents kicked down the road.  I would go back 64 years of that.  

Nice talking to you Joy.  Bring the heat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jdsample said:

I think you make a bunch of good points.  Socialism always rots from within at some point.  Afghanistan was very significant and the US under Reagan played a big part in arming the same guys who ironically turned into terrorists later.  I don't think Chernobyl was anything more than a black eye.  They had to abandon a town and lost face with the world.  Fukajima was probably worse, but arguably not purely human error.  

There were a couple of Lech Walensa's in the history of the Soviet empire.   But with every uprising Soviet tanks steam rolled the freedom movement.  The Soviets could have done that to Poland, but by then they were outclassed militarily and their status in the world was so diminished that rolling tanks through Warsaw would not have been in their interest.  Walensa was less a catalyst than the straw that broke the camel's back.  Soviets were in collapse for many reasons, but staunch US opposition was pretty damn important.  WIthout the US, they would have been the dominant power in the world.  They could have had their way in Poland, Afghanistan, etc.  

I agree with you on South Korea.  Also with North Korea if the world maintains its sanctions and isolates them.  Unfortunately for a number of decades they have been supported by many nations including the US in exchange for moderating bellicosity.  Are North Korea's days numbered?  Not if the world feeds them in exchange for not starting wars.  But if their days are numbered what will Kim & Company do when it seems inevitable that they will be executed or hung by his own people.  At that point a red button labeled "San Francisco" gets a little scary.  This is a problem that a bunch of presidents kicked down the road.  I would go back 64 years of that.  

Nice talking to you Joy.  Bring the heat!

Chernobyl had a tremendous impact within the Soviet Union in terms of the State's credibility. For the USSR is was a giant emperor has no clothes moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, WKDWZD said:

The ending of the cold war had far more to do with Gorbachev and his program of Glasnot and Perestroika than anything Ronnie Reagan and Maggie Thatcher came up with.

It was clear that the Soviet Union needed to adapt, because they were falling behind economically and even militarily.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Chernobyl is also a monument to the extinction of Soviet civilisation. As Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, reflected years later, the meltdown, “even more than my launch of perestroika, was perhaps the real cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union five years later.” It was a catalyst for glasnost, the opening-up of the Soviet media, which exposed the flaws of the Soviet system and set off the chain reaction that led to its ultimate destruction.

The ensuing cover-up was more deplorable than the errors that led to the explosion. Soviet officials did not report the accident. The first information came from sensors in Sweden, which detected a rise in radioactivity. While firefighters from Kiev were heroically trying to put out the blaze, receiving deadly doses of radiation in the process, children in Pripyat played football on the streets and couples celebrated weddings outdoors. Families walked onto a bridge to look at the fire, unaware that they were exposing themselves to the worst of the radioactive cloud. Throughout the day local officials kept silent. The decision to evacuate Pripyat's residents was made in the evening of the April 26th and overnight 1,100 buses were brought in. The following day, residents were given two hours to pack their essentials. The rest of the country was kept in the dark.

Finally, on April 28th, the government made a 15-second statement on the evening news: “There has been an accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.” It noted that “assistance has been provided” to those affected and that “an investigative commission has been set up”. On May 1st, while local Communist Party bosses were evacuating their own families, hundreds of thousands of ordinary people attended a May Day parade in Kiev, where radiation levels were several-fold higher than normal. Many came with children in short-sleeved shirts.

In fact, as a transcript of an emergency Politburo meeting shows, Gorbachev himself was furious over his limited access to information: “Everything was kept secret from the Central Committee. The whole system was penetrated by the spirit of boot-licking, persecution of dissidents, clannishness, window-dressing and nepotism. We will put an end to all this.”

Mr Gorbachev believed that to renew the Soviet system, he had to open up the channels of information. Within weeks glasnost began in earnest.

https://www.economist.com/news/europe/21697741-chernobyl-led-thousands-deaths-including-soviet-union-nuclear-disaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And the Communist Party found itself in the glare of harsh, critical scrutiny.

People could not forgive the authorities for their deceit about the levels of radiation, confusing health advice and their political callousness.

A classic example was their refusal to cancel the May Day rally in Kiev and their demand that children be brought into the streets to show that Kiev was safe.

When people later learned that some of the children of the party elite had been flown out of Kiev, they were devastated.

Failing system

Rallies in Ukraine organised by the green groups gathered tens of thousands of protesters. 

Slowly but surely their slogans started to change, as Chernobyl revealed itself as the symptom of a corrupt and failing system rather than a technological catastrophe.

Very soon a pro-independence movement grew on the back of the Chernobyl protests in Ukraine and Belarus - with the ineffectiveness of the Soviet system a key factor.

There was also the issue of money. The ongoing intervention in Afghanistan and catastrophic failures of the planned economy which had resulted in severe shortages of basic food staples even in Ukraine - the USSR's breadbasket - were already exerting a severe strain on the system

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36139863

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JoyinMudville said:

Chernobyl had a tremendous impact within the Soviet Union in terms of the State's credibility. For the USSR is was a giant emperor has no clothes moment.

I have never seen anything claiming that.  Has Japan's credibility been impacted by Fukajima?  That was three adjacent Chernobyls.  The US has had disasters.  It doesn't bring down a nation.  Like I said it was a black eye.  It wasn't like that was their only reactor and they didn't have a closet full of nuclear ICBMs.  Obviously it was bad press.  The Challenger disaster was bad press, too.  

I admit it was a SMH moment who knew anything about nuclear power but that doesn't include most of the general public.  The containment building had windows.  So what the hell was it going to contain?  The operators were experimenting as I recall without procedures.  But the technology was 1940's-1950's in that they used graphite as a moderator.  The US experimented with that very early on.  Graphite makes the reactor inherently unstable in the sense that it requires constant intervention to keep it from either shutting down or overheating and eventually melting down.  The problem is that when there is a fluctuation in temperature in the core, an increase in temperature causes the reaction rate and thus heat production to increase.  Without intervention it is a runaway.  Likewise, if the temperature drops a fraction, reaction rate and heat production decreases.  It is like trying to ride a bicycle backwards.  

Water moderated reactors are just the opposite and like actual bicycles you can ride them with no hands.  If the temperature fluctuates upward, the reaction rate and heat production reduce naturally.  That happens if the energy extraction is reduced.  If the temperature fluctuates downward (when the energy extraction from your generator increases) reaction rate and heat production increases.  The temperature is stable.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2018 at 0:20 PM, Calamari said:

https://www.cbssports.com/olympics/news/2018-olympics-mike-pence-doesnt-stand-for-korea-skips-meal-with-north-koreans/

That's the sound of the right forfeiting their outrage at any other political demonstration during the olympics, or ever.

It isn't that Pence didn't stand for North Korea, he didn't stand for a united Korean team. He's a putz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, hst2 said:

It isn't that Pence didn't stand for North Korea, he didn't stand for a united Korean team. He's a putz.

He really is as big of a child as Trump.

This petty snub really makes one suspect that he wanted war with NK, and was outmaneuvered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jdsample said:

I have never seen anything claiming that. 

I just showed you Gorbachev claiming that Chernobyl led to the unraveling of the USSR.

Why not try reading the posts and links from people who are knowledgeable about a particular subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, banner1124 said:

Kim Jong-un's sister verst the Vice President of the United States? :confused:

She is the highest ranking North Korean there, and Pence is the highest ranking American. Simple facts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jdsample said:

Evil Empire?  Perhaps you were too young.  

Not at all... and at the time those words made absolute sense did they not?  He sure as hell didn't call anyone rocket man like a child

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoyinMudville said:

I just showed you Gorbachev claiming that Chernobyl led to the unraveling of the USSR.

Why not try reading the posts and links from people who are knowledgeable about a particular subject?

Yes you did.  Gorby was a politician.  Do they ever make excuses?  Are they ever wrong?  Why hasn't Japan unraveled after three Chernobyls?  

Did you expect Gorby to say he was responsible because of perestroika and glasnost?  Did you expect Hillary to explain her failure as something she did?  Doesn't happen.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jdsample said:

Yes you did.  Gorby was a politician.  Do they ever make excuses?  Are they ever wrong?  Why hasn't Japan unraveled after three Chernobyls?  

Did you expect Gorby to say he was responsible because of perestroika and glasnost?  Did you expect Hillary to explain her failure as something she did?  Doesn't happen.  

It's pointless to try and have an intelligent conversation with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2018 at 8:40 PM, cprenegade said:

I think Pence was wrong in this case.  The Olympics are a time of worldwide competition that should be free of politics and political statements.  Politics and sports should be separated, period.  You want to make a statement, do it some other way on some other venue.  Leave all of the grandstanding out of sports, any and all of them.  If Pence was going to attend the Olympics he should have been respectful to all of the nations and leave political feelings at home.  

Yeah, those punks who humiliated the US in Mexico in 1968 should be rotting in jail right?  Great Leader and his sister would have had them in a coma one week into their lifetime sentence of hard labor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0