Secret Santa 2024
Originally Posted by 8OJ4N View Post
Heh, people spit bullshit about war as a good thing from the cozy place of their home, far away from anything.

I hope you never get the 'wake up call' from that delusion fueled by COD or BF3 u play on your shiny little console, because I wouldn't wish that even to my worst enemy.

War is great for a country's economy. USA spends more than 700 billion on military a year. Not to mention all the private companies. They employ more than 2 million people. That's pretty staggering. Don't underestimate how much of an economic driving force war is.

There are many benefits, from economic and technological to promoting growth and giving jobs to people that would otherwise cause trouble.

I'm not saying that countries should do what USA does and be at war constantly to try and sustain their economy, because obviously that is a bad idea unless you can put a massive percent of your economy and population in to it, but there are positives.
USA spends more than 700 billion on military a year.

Not to mention how much in debt they are? They owe the world around 10 trillion, look it up. http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

[Atlantic] [Ethr] [Team Australia]

12:18 AM - Sonic: I fucking want a bisexual pride flag cake.
Originally Posted by mwebs1 View Post
Not to mention how much in debt they are? They owe the world around 10 trillion, look it up. http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Debt isn't relevant to the claim. The claim is war improves an economy. The debt was caused by several assinine decisions to both lower taxes and increase spending by several political leaders, who have based their economic principles on debunked theories.

War has always had a stimulating effect on a country's economy in the short term because of the creation of several new jobs in the military, alongside the increased demand for wartime goods, which jumpstarts production, which creates more jobs.


However, all that is offtopic considering the thread's question. North Korea is theorized to be able to heavily damage South Korea's army and infrastructure should they release an all-out attack. For the most part, South Korea (and the U.S.) would be caught with their pants down during an initial attack because North Korea already has all their artillery pointed at strategic locations and are ready to fire at a moment's notice. However, technologically, North Korea is lacking heavily because of aging weaponry. While initial casualties would be high on the South Korean side, all simulations point towards an inevitable victory towards South Korea. What's more likely occurring is political posturing by Kim Jong Un to defend himself from possible in-fighting amongst his political party. He suffers from having to prove himself to a highly corrupt and ambitious group of politicians and generals that he can fullfil his father's and grandfather's shoes. Waving a stick at the U.S. is basically his only way of proving that he can play hardball with the best of them.
Last edited by Oracle; Apr 1, 2013 at 04:27 PM.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
well.. actually north korea didn't want to versus south korea, it's just because america is on south korea's side.. here is the story..
55years ago korea is a 1 country.. and then something happen (IDk what's actually happened). That things make korea seperate into south side and north side. north korea thought that things wich make korea is seperate are caused by USA and because south korea and USA are work together, north korea start to hate it, then uni soviet come to help north korea. north korea became the most isolated country. some of the citizens even don't know who's the first man who land on the moon. they think kim jong ill(north korea president) is kind of god. the libraries are filled with a book made by kim jong ill and his son.
actually I still have lots story about it, it's just too long xDD
adsfjksf
''War is good for our economy.''

Is that what they say to the family of American soldier who lost his life in some god forsaken country?

Well, maybe they should, it would be closer to truth then generic bullshit about 'protecting democracy' and all of that stuff.

Yeah, it's good for economy, new jobs, also new technologies were made every time when some war would erupt. If there isn't a war around we would probably just sit on our butts and waste all that money surplus that doesn't go for military and shiny new weapons.
Not that we have scientist that are making new breakthroughs during a piece time, right?
Riiiight.
''After the showers is the sun.
Will be shining...''
Originally Posted by Django77 View Post
''War is good for our economy.''

Is that what they say to the family of American soldier who lost his life in some god forsaken country?

Well, maybe they should, it would be closer to truth then generic bullshit about 'protecting democracy' and all of that stuff.

Yeah, it's good for economy, new jobs, also new technologies were made every time when some war would erupt. If there isn't a war around we would probably just sit on our butts and waste all that money surplus that doesn't go for military and shiny new weapons.
Not that we have scientist that are making new breakthroughs during a piece time, right?
Riiiight.

The moral implications of war have nothing to do with the argument at hand. In fact, nothing about this conversation about war having any significant merit or demerit is relevant to the argument at hand. If people are so interested in talking about the benefits and detriments of war, they should make a separate thread. This thread should at least try to stay on topic on the possible outcomes of a Korean peninsula conflict, or possible rationale for North Korea's increased aggression. Anything not directly relevant to that is getting off-topic.
nyan :3
Youtube Channel i sometimes post videos of other games
Originally Posted by TonsyKeim View Post
OMG what increase in agression? There is no increase in agression b4 I see dead soldiers on enemy (SKorea) side

Just because people aren't dead doesn't mean that they aren't increasing the aggressive acts (NKorea) it's like saying just because someone was yelling at someone doesn't mean they were being aggressive because the person they are yelling at isn't dead. (Not sure if that analogy works)

But in any case, yes NKorea is getting increasingly hostile. Weather they act on it or not is not the point, but they are becoming more and more destructive with their words. I think personally NKorea will get a hair up their ass in the near future (I mean near too) and attack SKorea resulting in a quick over take (Because as far as I know, NKorea's military is far superiors to SKorea's) Unless we (USA and other countries that actually give a shit about SKorea) come and help them. But there's always China that posses the threat of do we really want to do that... Ugh there are so many possibilities and variables I can't wrap my head around what might happen @_@. I think the statement I made will most likely prove true.
But in all reality... I think I might be insane...
Originally Posted by Django77 View Post
''War is good for our economy.''

Is that what they say to the family of American soldier who lost his life in some god forsaken country?

Well, maybe they should, it would be closer to truth then generic bullshit about 'protecting democracy' and all of that stuff.

Yeah, it's good for economy, new jobs, also new technologies were made every time when some war would erupt. If there isn't a war around we would probably just sit on our butts and waste all that money surplus that doesn't go for military and shiny new weapons.
Not that we have scientist that are making new breakthroughs during a piece time, right?
Riiiight.

I'm not sure what side you are arguing for, but military research is one of the largest sources of research funding. There is also proxy battle-fronts like NASA which was funded a ton during the cold war in order to beat the soviets for a strategic victory both in terms of morale and for control of space.

If USA was never hostile with the soviets do you think man would be on the moon so early?

Originally Posted by Agentmax View Post
Because as far as I know, NKorea's military is far superiors to SKorea's

North:
Available for military service 6,515,279 males, age 17-49 (2010 est.),
6,418,693 females, age 17-49 (2010 est.)
Active personnel 1,106,000 (ranked 5th)[2] (2010)
Reserve personnel 8,200,000 (2010) (ranked 1st)
Budget ~$2.3 billion to $10 billion

South:
Available for military service 12,483,677 (2005 est.), age 15–49
Active personnel 639,000 (2012)[1] (ranked 7th)
Reserve personnel 2,900,000 (2012)[1] (ranked 3rd)
Budget $30 billion

NK may have the numbers, but SK definitely has better equipment, especially considering their relationship with USA. Even if NK were to launch a surprise attack, SK has detection all along the boarder and the sea. In conjunction with USA they would probably know about any attack before it even got across the border.

Even if NK were to utilize their aging artillery and long range missiles, I doubt they could really do much.
Last edited by ImmortalCow; Apr 2, 2013 at 06:09 PM.
Despite the valiant efforts of a few, this thread turned really stupid really fast and is pretty much unsalvageable at this point.

"i wish i could do that ken watanabe face where his eyes are really wide" -siku 2015
DONSELUKE, MASTER OF LAWSUIT
if you love america please sign this petition
B&B&B&