This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - reachy
« on: June 08, 2004, 12:12:03 AM »
In realist terms, yes, it would be idiotic for South Korea to trust their self-defense to the United States entirely. However, arguably, NK does not give a *&^% about the South Korean military, it is the US that has provided the effective deterrence for all these years.
I would think if South Korea maintained no military, NK would have tried an invasion before, in the hopes that the US would not intervene
they tried before, it didn't work out [the chinese "volunteers" saved their commie ass]
I actually did a research paper on the PRC's decision to enter into the Korean war... Mao was the only one among his group of advisors who didn't think the US would nuke China for entering. Almost everyone was opposed to the idea, and Mao himself changed his decision at several points in time. However, to the surprise of even some of Mao's closest advisors, he decided to invade. It's funny thinking how history would have been different if Mao heeded "good counsel"...
« on: June 07, 2004, 11:30:42 PM »
It's not surprising that this is a subject you would take a lot of interest in.
I'm curious what you think the effect of Iraq will be on a scenario like this, with such a large percentage of available American forces committed to Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is a concern. US military power is already stretched thin. WE have 150,000 troops in Iraq right now? The good thing is we don't really need to committ a huge number of troops to Korea in the event of a war. South Korea has about 700,000 troops, plus another one million plus in reserves. These soldiers would bear the brunt of the fighting, with US firepower as a backup. Thankfully, the war in Iraq has boiled down to a peacekeeping operation, and aerial firepower is freed up, so that shouldn't be a problem.
BUT, SK's forces should be enough to repel a NK invasion. For a counterinvasion and regime change, I've seen estimates of almost 500,000 US troops being needed on top of the SK troops. This would be tough, if not impossible with what's going on in Iraq. Hopefully, if NK invades SK, other allies will help out, including Japan, and maybe some NATO allies of the US.
I think an interesting question is what North Korea would do if South Korea didn't maintain an army at all... do you think it would be certain that they would invade, even with the almost certain prospect of US intervention?
« on: June 07, 2004, 07:46:27 PM »
This is an excellent idea. There are 37,000 troops stationed in Korea, but they are merely a tripwire. Deterrence. All they are there to do is to remind North Korea that if they attack, they are more than likely going to kill an American. If this happens, the United States will retaliate. That's all they are there for.
No, 37,000 Americans won't do *&^% in the face of a million man army designed to invade South Korea. But the 700,000 South Korean troops trained to repel such an invasion will.
Indeed, most military experts feel South Korea alone can repel and defeat a North Korean invasion. I feel inclined to agree, considering the enormous firepower advantage on the South's side, along with the better training of their troops. Really, it doesn't matter if there are 100,000 Americans there or 5,000. They are there to make sure one of them gets killed if North Korea invades (pretty sad, but true). If this happens, the South Korean troops will bear the initial North Korean invasion (pretty effectively) and then the United States will conduct aerial raids from Okinawa and battleship carrier groups which will pretty much pound the North Koreans to dust.
The horrible thing about all of this will be that Seoul will be taken out. (civilian casualties could hit the 100s of thousands). This is why the South is taking great pains not to provoke North Korea. On the other hand, if N. Korea invades, their regime is over. So that's the South's deterrence.
Very insightful. You're right that it's sad that Seoul would get pummeled... such a damned nice city, so many buildings that would be destroyed... Man that would be a disaster
« on: June 07, 2004, 04:21:28 PM »
« on: June 07, 2004, 11:35:24 AM »
As part of the whole 'strategic redeployment', I don't think it's a bad idea, and is mutually beneficial for both SK and the US. For SK, it is seen as an illustration of the country's independence, and for the US, well it frees up some troops for redeployment. Besides, what can 37,500 US troops do against a 1.1 million man NK army anyway....
« on: June 01, 2004, 07:11:55 PM »
That's the thing... at least for my girlfriend, she's REALLY sweet and adorable in public and everyone loves her, but when she's not in the public scene, she can be really mean and crazy!!
taiwanese girls suck. i dated one. the damn female dog cheated on me.
weird, most of the taiwanese girls i know are the sweetest people...
and japanese girls are submissive? i thought korean girls were and the chinese girls were the most aggressive...
well i'm not submissive... not at all. maybe that's why korean guys don't really like me.
« on: June 01, 2004, 07:08:41 PM »
I wonder if there's a difference between Korean girls from Korea and those in America... it seemed to me that the ones in Korea were much hotter, and just better dating material in general. Any experiences?
i would have to agree with dsong that taiwanish girls are bitches. you either have the ones who are sluts cause their daddy's "protected" them from the outside world and when they get to college, they go all out. or you have the ones who are so stuck up, they only date white dudes cause they think it heightens their status. only 10% of em are even worth asking out. i also agree with cho that koreans are hotter (girls only, the guys are busted).
but we should get off such an esoteric subject before the white people start changing their avatars again.
« on: June 01, 2004, 07:05:13 PM »
Hahahaha... well actually that's what I did. I simplified the story somewhat... started with 500 against this guy (that was my profit), lost it, then put 400 of my original principal on the line, lost that, then was so pissed off that i put 700 on the line, grew that to a HUGE amount, then somehow lost that too (in 10/20 poker avg. pot size is 100+)
So yeah, I actually got all of it back multiple times, but I'm just a greedy idiot, and I'd be stupid to think I could win back $1500 (and my Neteller account said I hit my weekly spending limit, lol) so i just say screw poker
Just now, I did have $11 left, and went all in with AA preflop, and some guy had 10 6 and got 2pair... wtf is that!! Ohhh well hopefully I'll just do well at Columbia and $1500 will be nothing.
But Damn! Could've gotten a new laptop.
She cheated on you for a gay guy? Dude, that's sad. I would have beaten him with a baseball bat. Just for fun. Then I would have gone to work on him. I think I would have beaten her too. Then go to work on her. Oh well, that's just me, I have a slight temper problem.
Reachy needs to be a man. He needs to get some more money, put it on the line, and win back what he lost. Problem solved. Step up, Rounders style.
« on: June 01, 2004, 05:17:13 PM »
heheh i compromised and told her i lost 350... if i told her i lost 1600 i dont think she would ever talk to me again... shes pretty fiery, a taiwanese girl
i heard japanese girls are the most submissive among the asians... that true? and who are the most UNsubmissive?? dont know how korean girls are, never dated one!
Korean guys suck.
korean women are... ok they suck too. fine we all suck.
Oh and good luck... tell your gf. don't worry, if she really loves you she may act angry to get her way for a bit while she's already forgiven you... women are awesome like that.
« on: June 01, 2004, 04:32:37 PM »
Dude what is it with us Koreans ... Gambling, Drinking, Egocentric men ... the most vile race on the planet
yeah i dont know its just addicting... i guess people have to find out the hard way not to gamble, because when youre up you keep playing more and when youre down ... yeah
well the other guy was sitting with 3000, so i didnt really have much choice... he kept calling and raising anything, and kept getting lucky river pairs so it was ridiculous
...been there, done that.
rule of thumb in limit poker: you should never lose more than 40x the LB. you took 160x to the table. that was your mistake.
just take your beating like a man.
thats when you leave that table and go to another.
was this online or b&m?
just a word of advice from a guy that knows what gambling can do...
quit when you can. winning playing poker is like winning the lottery. though there is skill involved, 20% is still luck.
trust me - i used to attend GA meetings. you never want to go that far.