|
Hospital fire kills more than 30.  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/deadly-hospital-fire-south-korea-sejong-hospital-miryang-today-2018-01-26/
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:25 |
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Hospital fire kills more than 30. I remember only like a year ago there was a deadly fire that killed a bunch of olds in a nursing home in korea as well, I remember being really mad because it described the whole thing in detail and it was an absolute inexcusable failure in the very basics of both fire safety and nursing care.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I remember only like a year ago there was a deadly fire that killed a bunch of olds in a nursing home in korea as well, I remember being really mad because it described the whole thing in detail and it was an absolute inexcusable failure in the very basics of both fire safety and nursing care. Unless you're in a large public building built after 2010 this doesn't exist, and even then it's iffy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
Antares posted:Are there good periodicals with English editions? The only recommendations I've had in the past were joongang daily & Korea times, which seemed pretty light in general. Unfortunately they're about all that exist. I don't know even know where you'd find an English print edition of a Korean newspaper outside of a hotel lobby. You're lucky to even have that much- they make those for Korean people trying to learn English, not foreigners, so simplicity is baked in as a concept. Baronjutter posted:I remember only like a year ago there was a deadly fire that killed a bunch of olds in a nursing home in korea as well, I remember being really mad because it described the whole thing in detail and it was an absolute inexcusable failure in the very basics of both fire safety and nursing care. The sauna incident in Jecheon was even more recent than that. Safety standards in South Korea were on the backburner for the last two governments. A new sprinkler law that might have helped the situation here was unfortunately still in the grace period.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2018 12:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CurtMills/status/958082178054836227 Keep in mind that this article only claims that Bolton may be a leading candidate - from what I've read, most of it is just praise from former administrative officials, and not even any hints about replacing McMaster Of course, everyone is freaking out https://twitter.com/NarangVipin/status/958109219882000385
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
In other news, what was predicted has come to pass, what goes in the mouth shall leave through the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KingstonAReif/status/958480550632796160
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:00
|
|
|
after hearing 3/4 of congress standing and chanting "USA" to donald trump i hope we do get loving nuked
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 05:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/willripleyCNN/status/958550703575715841
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
So we're pretty much going to go 4 years with no ambassador to South Korea aren't we? Edit: If the above post is true then I feel that's a miscalculation on Kim's part. I see it strengthening the hand of those in the White House arguing to strike North Korea before it's weapons can reach the US. OhFunny fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
If anything, the US becomes more likely to shoot first in that case.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 09:22
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Antares posted:after hearing 3/4 of congress standing and chanting "USA" to donald trump i hope we do get loving nuked Bloody hell did this really happen?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 12:06
|
|
|
Yup.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 12:14
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:If anything, the US becomes more likely to shoot first in that case. A nuclear strike would be great for my career prospects as I am exactly the sort of entitled white idiot with no relevant experience that Republicans like putting in charge of rebuilding a country. So you know, fingers crossed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 14:47
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:If anything, the US becomes more likely to shoot first in that case. I doubt a military parade would be enough for the U.S. to strike North Korea
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 15:19
|
|
|
A military parade + Kim calling trump a pussy on fox and friends.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Whoa, who gave you that avatar Willo? I agree with the sentiment, and find it rather insane how supposed Korea experts have been saying that for literally decades now, but as far as I can tell you're not an especially strong proponent of that viewpoint. Actually reviewing your posts in this thread it's not clear you believe that at all, unlike some posters who come to mind. Unless it's supposed to be about war alarmism and not North Korea's imminent structural collapse. I mean I can kind of get the first one but the joke works much better with the second one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:I doubt a military parade would be enough for the U.S. to strike North Korea No one is going to attack North Korea because of a parade. The point is that provocations like this provide a pattern of behavior for hawks in Trump's White House to use to sell a war. We're in a very strange situation where North Korea has to be the adult in the room, because the people on the other side of the table are basically looking for any excuse to start a war and the person with the power to make a final decision is too stupid to ignore them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 04:01
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:I doubt a military parade would be enough for the U.S. to strike North Korea It would be a great place for an decapitation strike though. Kim sitting on the podium would be a perfect target for a JDAM. Not to mention it would probably take out a large part of his senior military leadership too. Of course the nukes would probably still fly after that. Im sure there's a policy in North Korea to launch everything if Kim is taken out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:It would be a great place for an decapitation strike though. Kim sitting on the podium would be a perfect target for a JDAM. Not to mention it would probably take out a large part of his senior military leadership too. Americans definitely aren't a bunch of fascists who openly idealize assassinating the head of state for a country they dislike
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:59
|
|
|
Didn't see it mentioned that Victor Cha, long expected to be the ambassador to SK, was withdrawn from consideration. From what I gather he was widely considered as 'sane.' He then published this editorial: Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans posted:North Korea, if not stopped, will build an arsenal with multiple nuclear missiles meant to threaten the U.S. homeland and blackmail us into abandoning our allies in Asia. North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un will sell these weapons to state and nonstate actors, and he will inspire other rogue actors who want to undermine the U.S.-backed postwar order. These are real and unprecedented threats. But the answer is not, as some Trump administration officials have suggested, a preventive military strike. Instead, there is a forceful military option available that can address the threat without escalating into a war that would likely kill tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Americans. My question is if it was this argument that led to his rejection, or if he was rejected because of his pro-trade stance with SK and this editorial is an effort to continue the bluff of the hypothetical 'bloody nose' strike. My guess is that the 'bloody nose' strike idea is entirely a bluff and that military leaders are gambling on Trump's reputation for unpredictability and lack of concern for the lives of non-Americans to make it more convincing, and that Cha was rejected because he pointed out that abrogating our trade agreement with SK is moronic, but then wrote this editorial in an effort to make it seem that the bluff could be a real thing. Of course if Bolton ends up in the administration, who knows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
I missed this Myers interview last month but posting in case anyone is interested: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2018/01/the_problem_with_south_korea_yes_south_korea.html A quote: quote:Pyongyang has been listening to American bluster for exactly half a century now, since the USS Pueblo was taken with impunity in 1968. Not once in Kim Jong-un’s lifetime has the U.S. done anything to North Korea beyond imposing sanctions the Chinese have undermined. The very phrase to tweet a threat is unserious; the medium is the message in a very bad way. Besides, whenever Trump says something tough, his own officials and generals promptly relativize it, and the U.S. media acts as if he were the whole cause of the nuclear crisis. The impression the North Koreans get is of a weak, unpopular leader, a divided administration, and an America completely ignorant of their drive to unify the peninsula. Trump’s rhetoric has also encouraged sympathy with Pyongyang in South Korea, where people balk at harsh criticism of their ethnic brethren. There were some very grumpy faces in South Korea’s National Assembly when Trump spoke out there against the Kim regime's human rights abuses. Having said all that, I think his unpredictability probably makes the North Koreans nervous; they might well have engaged in more dangerous provocations had he not been elected. http://sthelepress.com/
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:"I know I’ll harden my reputation for curmudgeonliness..." Edit: In the interests of saying something substantive, the issue I take with Myers' argument is that Pyongyang may very well read the U.S. as not giving a poo poo about any lives that aren't American lives, giving rise to the belief that artillery batteries aimed at Seoul aren't enough. Even in Cha's editorial, the relatively tiny number of Americans living in South Korea come before the millions of people living in the Seoul region. Speaking of North Korea vis-a-vis Stalinism, Myers objects to the assumption that North Korea is a police state on the grounds that they don't have the resources to have a huge number of police officers in proportion to the general population. But Bradley wrote a lot about how heavily policed and politicized the DPRK's schools and workplaces have been historically. Is there information showing that that's changed a great deal in the past few decades? Halloween Jack fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Hah! He's just polishing a diamond at this point. But of course they aren't enough? And of course the Trump administration of all people is least going to care about lives, period, let alone non-American lives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ColinKahl/status/959095018907668481 Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I feel as though most of the blame can be placed on the Trump administration, but part of me thinks that these nuclear "experts" telling people how likely war with North Korea is and how the administration isn't bluffing doesn't help matters either
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
It's a weird balance between people rightly pointing out the idea is terrible seems to be in the cards, and people who are trying to make it seem like it's in the cards because they want the bluff to be believable. (I really think that McMaster is bluffing.) Rogin is sort of correct in that the more this goes on, the more likely miscalculations will be, because we are purposefully obscuring our actual strategy. But it's not the fault of people who look at what is being said and point out it would be terrible, they can't be expected to do otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
Wait, we have an actual strategy here? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:Whoa, who gave you that avatar Willo? I agree with the sentiment, and find it rather insane how supposed Korea experts have been saying that for literally decades now, but as far as I can tell you're not an especially strong proponent of that viewpoint. Actually reviewing your posts in this thread it's not clear you believe that at all, unlike some posters who come to mind. it's willo, it's about alarmism
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
It's nonsense to blame pundits and experts for their hot takes on the situation, because the fact that people would be panicking over a potential confrontation is something that the White House should have considered when pursuing any kind of aggressive strategy. If Kim's regime is unstable enough to trigger a war because someone on Twitter suggests that the US is going to strike first then it was a loving grave miscalculation on Trump's part to "negotiate" in a way that makes it look to outside observers like we're going to start a war. I don't actually think that's the case, by the way, I just think it's really stupid to be concerned about what non-governmental observers are saying. The media is going to do what the media does and any kind of publicly visible strategy has to take that into account. You don't get to pretend that we're on the brink of war and then act surprised when people who closely follow international relations are all "oh whoa, are we on the brink of war?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
that victor cha editorial is framed entirely around the number of americans who would die. pretty gross also the dude is a bush-era scumbag and shouldn't be taken as a "voice of reason"
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 02:13
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:that victor cha editorial is framed entirely around the number of americans who would die. pretty gross Funnily enough most of the critics about the administration's approach on North Korea love Cha
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Funnily enough most of the critics about the administration's approach on North Korea love Cha they do. it's similar to other liberal rehabilitations of bush administration ghouls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 02:22
|
|
|
R. Guyovich posted:they do. it's similar to other liberal rehabilitations of bush administration ghouls. Or Kissinger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 02:23
|
|
|
Trumpy is meeting NoCo defectors tomorrow https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m=.97b81f014ce0 Willo567 fucked around with this message at 12:25 on Feb 2, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
Should be NoCo and SoCo. Unless you support Japanese Imperialism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
Lote posted:Should be NoCo and SoCo. Unless you support Japanese Imperialism. Sorry. I didn't know what I originally posted was a slur Also https://www.nbcnews.com/news/north-korea/trump-weighs-barring-u-s-military-south-korea-bringing-families-n844041 It's not imminent, but apparently if it is changed, it would only involve future deployments; the current dependents can still stay Makes no loving sense, but whatever
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 22:23
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:Sorry. I didn't know what I originally posted was a slur quote:The idea of making all tours in Korea unaccompanied is not new, but gained new traction when President Donald Trump saw retired Gen. Jack Keane comment about the issue on FOX News, arguing the Pentagon should stop sending families there to allow the troops to prepare for possible war with North Korea, according to two U.S. officials. lmao of course
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:lmao of course I'm just glad he isn't taking advice from Bolton on North Korea Also, they were apparently talking about stopping accompanying tours six months ago, but it's probably being brought up again because Trump's an idiot
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:A nuclear strike would be great for my career prospects as I am exactly the sort of entitled white idiot with no relevant experience that Republicans like putting in charge of rebuilding a country. ooh, maybe i could get in on the roads! wait, no, i have too much experience, how about *rolls dice* port security
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 18:25 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/JChengWSJ/status/959555277270917120 How reliable is the source (on the story I mean)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 00:41
|
|