|
Crasscrab posted:Oh, so we're there for moral support. Good to know! The entire post war history of it has been American troop amounts slowly drawing down as the South Korean and Japanese forces were built up. But there will never be 0 American troops there unless North Korea ever finally ends.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Looks like there might be some deep cover liberals over at Fox News. One of their correspondents donated $500 to the Obama campaign while trashing Obama voters on tv. It's just viral marketing for that new FX series "The Americans".  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikSLiJYzxrE
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Crasscrab posted:Oh, so we're there for moral support. Good to know! They're there as a tripwire. Anyone attacking either Korea or Japan know that they're also declaring war on the US.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Since NK is a rogue state that possesses a nuclear weapon expect to see US troops fully withdrawn sometime shortly after never, ever, ever. I was stationed there a few years ago and it's a heck of an experience. It's a shame that some people aren't mature enough to handle an experience like getting to live in Seoul on the government's dime. There are koreans that don't like us being there, koreans that like us being there (or more accurately, all your US dollars), but it seemed like most were apathetic. I had an actual Korean War Vet (of the Korean variety) thank me for being there. Sometimes the younger set would try out their english and it was all very  It was one of the best experiences of my life, even though I didn't think so at the time. It really pissed me off to see people gently caress that up. By and large most of the people stationed there are regular guys doing a job, but it seems like the incidents that DO happen are really godawful. And I do agree that they do seem to get off a lot lighter than they should, although not always. The UCMJ can and will gently caress people pretty hard (especially lower enlisted) when they do horrible things. SK also has mandatory military service, and the effect that it has on society is interesting - in that it's the polar opposite of the military hero worship that a lot of GIPpers (myself included) find a little creepy and overbearing sometimes. I asked one of them once if the ladies love the soldiers and he said "Are you crazy? It's so uncool to be in the military." It's just a thing you gotta do. Women know that as a soldier you don't make any money (conscripts were paid about 80,000 won a month, which was a little over seventy bucks then) and that you basically have no life until your service is up. Conscripts are all male, but there are supposedly females in the ROK army - although I was always told to steer clear of them, for they were the hardest of core. Never had any opportunity to see it for myself though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:39
|
|
|
Crasscrab posted:Oh, so we're there for moral support. Good to know! Or for coordinating with military allies, I think is another way of saying it. "Foreign troops on are soil? Sovereignty!"  All Of The Dicks fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Dec 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:40
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:They're there as a tripwire. Anyone attacking either Korea or Japan know that they're also declaring war on the US. You don't have to have troops to do that. You need to say "If Japan or South Korea were to be attacked, the United States would do everything in its power to defend them." Though US military presence in post-war Japan ostensibly helped them boost their economy at a time when it was desperately needed (money that would have been spent on a military instead being spent on civilian industries), that doesn't mean it's relevant in 2012. Same for South Korea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:44
|
|
|
If I ever needed any indication that at least some of the people on Fox News are spewing their invective solely for a paycheck rather than out of any personal belief, I suppose this does it. Next, I want to find out that Hannity is secretly voting straight Democratic ticket, and that Twitter pic or whatever it was of his ballot was just a phony.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:52
|
|
|
We'll never cut and run from our allies, those ungrateful foreigners who should pay for their own defense. Cut taxes to zero while increasing military spending. Build more bases overseas, but use only And if Obama steals our idea and does it first, it's the end of the republic. If we do it first, 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2012 23:58
|
|
|
Mo Tzu posted:You don't have to have troops to do that. You need to say "If Japan or South Korea were to be attacked, the United States would do everything in its power to defend them." They need troops there to do it because then the argument isn't, "an ally has been attacked, we must help!" it's "ARE TROOPS HAVE BEEN ATTACKED! Anybody who is against the war is a communist hippie and now we pass an even better Patriot Act!   "
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
The US maintains military bases in SK and Japan for the same reason it maintains military bases everywhere else, to be able to undertake military operations across the entire planet. No other nation has a military complex as far reaching as the US, and even if the chances for interstate war are remote in many areas, the US isn't going to give up its forward operating points because of the principle of sovereignty. NK is a good excuse for their presence in SK, but in reality the US just doesn't want to give up bases ever. The base on Okinawa is enormously unpopular, and serves no real purpose unless you think the US is going to start engaging China in the Pacific ( ), but it won't stop the US from maintaining it indefinitely.That being said, it's not like the US is trying to be an evil occupation force in Japan or South Korea. Much as the transition was bloody and repressive, South Korea is still looked at as a big success when it comes to post-war state-building and democratization. A long term US presence was a big contributing factor in that. Political Whores fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 00:04
|
|
|
Crasscrab posted:It's something that wouldn't have happened if large, military grade vehicles weren't barreling down a civilian road in a country that isn't their own. Nice strawman. No one is justifying the US military presence in Korea in this thread. This is about ensuring innocent men are granted a fair trial. If S. Korea doesn't like it they can renegotiate the SOFA treaty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:01
|
|
|
Or, maybe, the point of an artist saying 'this was utter bullshit and you should be ashamed of yourselves' isn't literally demanding show trials (still curious why any South Korean court falls under that), but rather simply expressing an emotion he feels is common in his people?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Nice strawman. No one is justifying the US military presence in Korea in this thread. This is about ensuring innocent men are granted a fair trial. If S. Korea doesn't like it they can renegotiate the SOFA treaty. Iraq did just this, to great effect. Well, less 'renegotiate' and more 'allow to expire'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
Glitterbomber posted:Or, maybe, the point of an artist saying 'this was utter bullshit and you should be ashamed of yourselves' isn't literally demanding show trials (still curious why any South Korean court falls under that), but rather simply expressing an emotion he feels is common in his people? I'm not attacking PSY. I'm not advocating for the American military presence in Korea. But I admit "show trial" was a poor choice of words. I prefer that people not be tried in countries where over-whelming public hostility could influence the court's decision. Full Battle Rattle posted:Iraq did just this, to great effect. Well, less 'renegotiate' and more 'allow to expire'. Good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:I'm not attacking PSY. I'm not advocating for the American military presence in Korea. But I admit "show trial" was a poor choice of words. I prefer that people not be tried in countries where over-whelming public hostility could influence the court's decision. Isn't that literally all high profile cases, though?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
Mo Tzu posted:Isn't that literally all high profile cases, though? Hell if we're going by 'hostility possibly tainting things' isn't that near any case involving a minority in a country?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Good? Depends on who you ask, I suppose. The ROK government is far, far more stable than the one we left in Iraq, to be sure. There were and are an alarming number of people who felt that Obama could have somehow negotiated harder to keep troops in Iraq. While I was over there, I never heard a single good argument for it, apart from some really vague notion of 'stability'. It was just attempted right-wing sabotaging of literally everything that Obama does.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:36
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Depends on who you ask, I suppose. The ROK government is far, far more stable than the one we left in Iraq, to be sure. I honestly don't know much about Korean history despite all the Korean theologians I read. Isn't that completely coincidental to America's involvement? We left a military dictatorship in power didn't we? EDIT: Nevermind, a military dictatorship is still more stable than Iraq. Senju Kannon fucked around with this message at 01:49 on Dec 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:Okay CBS isn't exactly right wing but I bet fox news will bring this up. Those goshdarn rappers all hate america! The article posted:the Drudge Report characterized Common's visit in the headline: "First Lady to host rapper who talks of killing cops, burning Bush." ... Franklin?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Like some minor celebrity demanding a stopped train pass through a tunnel that will kill everyone on-board (it's a coal train and the tunnel has no ventilation or some poo poo, I don't remember), and the railroad company literally firing everyone who said "No way man it's gonna kill everyone" until someone finally says "Okay let it go through hurrr the railroad can't risk a snub from this C-list celeb" and then everybody dies. There's also a scene that stuck out to me where a team of the brilliant capitalists is trying to rescue John Galt, and one of them gets the drop on a marine and is all "Move or I'll shoot you" and the marine's all "B-b-but I was told to follow orders to NOT move!" and then the capitalist says "If you follow your orders you'll die you have to make a decision on your own to not die" and since the marine is a stupid incompetent government worker he literally stands there sputtering and spasming like a robot that's been told a paradox going "Orders, but I don't wanna die but I have ORDERS but if I follow them I WILL die BEEP BOOP ERROR" until the capitalist shoots him. The Fountainhead may be one of the funniest books I've ever read. Ayn Rand is like the M. Night Shyamalan of libertarian fiction. I refuse to believe The Happening was not meant to be comedic, and similarly Ayn Rand's work comes across quite often as more comedic than philosophical. Everything she has written reads like brilliant satire because it is so naive and sophomoric. The fact that she's adored as this great intellect constantly confounds me. Why the gently caress did she choose to display her philosophy in the form of terribly-written novels? It seems like she really intended to write these awesome novels, but then couldn't stop herself from injecting her awful world view. Then everyone coming later has to be like, "ignore all the terrible writing, her philosophy is what you're there for."
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 03:00
|
|
|
ErIog posted:The Fountainhead may be one of the funniest books I've ever read. Ayn Rand is like the M. Night Shyamalan of libertarian fiction. I refuse to believe The Happening was not meant to be comedic, and similarly Ayn Rand's work comes across quite often as more comedic than philosophical. Everything she has written reads like brilliant satire because it is so naive and sophomoric. The fact that she's adored as this great intellect constantly confounds me. That's kinda how I felt when reading The Fountainhead too. "Well this whole thing with the architects and the business man and all them would be pretty interesting if Ayn Rand would shut the gently caress up and stop channeling her idiotic opinions through the characters." I could forgive the book for not being realistic and my not agreeing with it if it was written well, but, sadly, we all know that's apparently asking too much with Ayn Rand.  One good thing I got out of that experience was something to tell my friends when critiquing their work and they insist on, after showing us whatever they want to get across, explaining it through exposition anyways: "you're Ayn Randing again." 
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
ErIog posted:The Fountainhead may be one of the funniest books I've ever read. Ayn Rand is like the M. Night Shyamalan of libertarian fiction. I refuse to believe The Happening was not meant to be comedic, and similarly Ayn Rand's work comes across quite often as more comedic than philosophical. Everything she has written reads like brilliant satire because it is so naive and sophomoric. The fact that she's adored as this great intellect constantly confounds me. I was recommended the exact opposite by my mother. I probably got about 25 pages before I got bored? That was a really weird gift from her considering that she's a stone's throw away from being a socialist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2012 03:33
|
|
|
Mo Tzu posted:I honestly don't know much about Korean history despite all the Korean theologians I read. Isn't that completely coincidental to America's involvement? We left a military dictatorship in power didn't we? The US didn't technically leave a military dictatorship in power following the "end" of the Korean war, but it turned into one because it wasn't stable, and neither were the following regimes until relatively recently. Like, they had their fair share of coups, repression, torture and massacres all the way into the 1980's. And they are lucky they backslide completely during the Asian financial crisis of the 90's. The only example of he US setting up a replacement government that didn't soon fail, and the responsibility wasn't really shared, is Japan post-WWII. Over all, the US has an abysmal track record for that sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 02:06
|
|
|
Beowulfs_Ghost posted:The US didn't technically leave a military dictatorship in power following the "end" of the Korean war, but it turned into one because it wasn't stable, and neither were the following regimes until relatively recently. Like, they had their fair share of coups, repression, torture and massacres all the way into the 1980's. And they are lucky they backslide completely during the Asian financial crisis of the 90's. Even with Japan, the ties the US kept with it weren't small. The US didn't have direct control, but its shadow was certainly looming over Japan for decades afterwards. The US also invested a poo poo-ton of resources into rebuilding Japan to act as a counter-balance to Soviet power, and as as staging ground for its operations in Asia and the Pacific. There really hasn't been a comparable state-building exercise to what happened in post-WWII Japan and West Germany.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 03:17
|
|
|
I don't think we've discussed this one here yet, but remember when we were recently having a good chuckle at Ann Coulter's expense, because she was demoralized and telling Sean Hannity "We lost the election!" And how she was showing a rare flash of sanity because she said that since Republicans are going to get blamed either way, they should go ahead and go along with Obama on the tax increases because it'd at least be good PR? Fear not, as our favorite skeletal embodiment of hate has made a true return to form. quote:Republicans looking to reach out to Latinos may want to avoid the advice of Ann Coulter. quote:Coulter implies in her piece that non-whites are “nitwits who deserve lives of misery and joblessness.” She singles out immigrants from Latin America as particularly “nitwitty,” saying they have too many babies out of wedlock, without citing a published source for the assertion. Nearly half of undocumented-immigrant households -- 45 percent -- consisted of a spouse or cohabiting couple with one or more children, compared to 34 percent of legal immigrants and 21 percent of the U.S. born, according to a 2010 Pew Hispanic Study.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 10:20
|
|
|
I seriously think she has a psychological problem that makes her unable to discern how far is too far when making a joke. I think a lot of conservatives have this problem. There is no dividing line between their sense of humor and their bigotry. It all just kind of runs together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 10:26
|
|
|
When your sense of humor isquote:There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. you basically lose your ability to distinguish comedy and the exercise of power.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 10:30
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I seriously think she has a psychological problem that makes her unable to discern how far is too far when making a joke. I think a lot of conservatives have this problem. There is no dividing line between their sense of humor and their bigotry. It all just kind of runs together. Until I saw how depressed and demoralized she was on Hannity's show, I would have totally bought that Coulter (along with a bunch of other conservative pundits) just says whatever outrageous thing that comes into her mind purely because she knows the right-wing lunatics she panders to will eat it up, no matter how ludicrous it is. After seeing that, though, I'm not quite so sure anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 10:44
|
|
|
Sure she comes from a vile place, but she has to function in the real world, so she justifies it by fancying herself a "right wing Mark Twain" or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 10:57
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Sure she comes from a vile place, but she has to function in the real world, so she justifies it by fancying herself a "right wing Mark Twain" or whatever. It's more like the Republican party is James Fenimore Cooper, and she's one of the people Twain quotes as defending him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 11:07
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I seriously think she has a psychological problem that makes her unable to discern how far is too far when making a joke. I think a lot of conservatives have this problem. There is no dividing line between their sense of humor and their bigotry. It all just kind of runs together. In another thread someone explained why the fox news version of the daily show didnt work, due to the nature of conservative humor. I cant articulate it well but i realized that daniel tosh's humor is really close to that. He mostly says hateful things
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 12:31
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Sure she comes from a vile place, but she has to function in the real world, so she justifies it by fancying herself a "right wing Mark Twain" or whatever. Anyone who ever once considers comparing themselves or anyone else to Mark Twain is an egotist of the lowest form or an absolute dolt. Also - Hell, Clemens could practically be talking about hacks like Coulter and their audience in this quote: Mark Twain posted:The trouble is that the stupid people -- who constitute the grand overwhelming majority of this and all other nations -- do believe and are molded and convinced by what they get out of a newspaper. And furthermore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxCW9xmamzQ
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 12:50
|
|
|
Spacedad posted:Anyone who ever once considers comparing themselves or anyone else to Mark Twain is an egotist of the lowest form or an absolute dolt. Did Coulter ever compare herself to Twain? I don't recall reading anything where she did, but then I also wouldn't put it past her or any other Republican pundit. Especially as they like to ignore poo poo that doesn't support their worldview, so Twain and his opinions on politics, government, and religion would be right up their street.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 13:52
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:Did Coulter ever compare herself to Twain?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 21:08
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:I just used that as an example. When you watch her speak you can see she's very amused by herself and gets a kick out of being outrageous. She seems to see herself as a political humorist with a strong point of view, in the vein of Twain, Maher, Carlin etc (that's how she comes across to me, anyway). She sees herself that way, but in actuality she's more of a bigot trying to make her terrible ideas more appealing through "edgy" humor. What the gently caress is Bill Maher doing in that sentence. Maher and Coulter are like peas in a pod, they actually dated. Because God isn't real, the taxi in which they were traveling safely arrived at its destination.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:What the gently caress is Bill Maher doing in that sentence. beatlegs posted:She seems to see herself as a political humorist with a strong point of view ... I'd call that an accurate description of Bill Maher, whether you like him or not. Would it have have bothered you less if beatlegs listed Lewis Black?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 00:29
|
|
|
Mark Twain: political humorist with a strong point of view; titanic force in the history of comedy George Carlin: political humorist with a strong point of view; titanic force in the history of comedy Bill Maher: unbearably smug down-punching twat with a changeable set of views (nobody seems to remember him browbeating Muslims on his show after 9/11) My objection was to the company in which beatlegs placed him. And no, I don't think he has strong views, he's the basest of joiners and panderers and would have a right-wing schtick if the market weren't so saturated. It's actually not a derail to discuss him as his audience is the biggest gaggle of dittoheads I've ever seen on TV. Bill Maher: "Bush"  Audience: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
He still browbeats Muslims. Did you watch Religulous? Granted, Christianity and Judaism didn't exactly escape unscathed, but still.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 01:24
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bill Maher: unbearably smug down-punching twat with a changeable set of views (nobody seems to remember him browbeating Muslims on his show after 9/11) No he still does that. People just don't pay attention I guess. colonelslime posted:Even with Japan, the ties the US kept with it weren't small. The US didn't have direct control, but its shadow was certainly looming over Japan for decades afterwards. The US also invested a poo poo-ton of resources into rebuilding Japan to act as a counter-balance to Soviet power, and as as staging ground for its operations in Asia and the Pacific. There really hasn't been a comparable state-building exercise to what happened in post-WWII Japan and West Germany. Wasn't it because of the US that one party had a stranglehold on the government for 50-odd years?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:03 |
|
|
Wasn't he the same one who lost his show for saying that the 9/11 hijackers weren't cowards on air? Maybe he's still overcompensating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2012 01:27
|
|
