U.S. military told to get ready in Korea standoff

[BigPapaVol]

How so?

By acting as if our smooth talk somehow ended their program and essentially ignoring their efforts. Probably overstated, but we definitley assumed them on the path to righteousness.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[BigPapaVol]

The only stalemate last time was because of political considerations, if Truman had turned McArther loose we would have a united noncommunist Korea today.

Same goes for the Vietnam experience.

Discounting our concerns with China is a bad idea.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[MontereyVol]

By acting as if our smooth talk somehow ended their program and essentially ignoring their efforts. Probably overstated, but we definitley assumed them on the path to righteousness.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

They pissed off and stunned more than just the US with that move. I don't really see it as our fault as we were limited in what we could do.

But I get your point.

 

[MontereyVol]

The only stalemate last time was because of political considerations, if Truman had turned McArther loose we would have a united noncommunist Korea today.

Wow, we would also have a nuclear annihilated peninsula and an eternal war with most of Asia and Russia. MacArthur was an ego maniacal idiot that should have been replaced much, much sooner than he was.

 

[JTrainDavis]

And smart bombs don't work in the mountains of Afghanistan?

I'll go out on a limb and say that the NKPA has a more effective AA contingent than the Taliban.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[MontereyVol]

I'll go out on a limb and say that the NKPA has a more effective AA contingent than the Taliban.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

That and they don't shoot from the hip.

 

[vol_in_ar]

I'll go out on a limb and say that the NKPA has a more effective AA contingent than the Taliban.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The taliban doesn't drink why would they need AA

 

[gsvol]

Discounting our concerns with China is a bad idea.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You mean today I assume?

No doubt.

If you are talking about the Korean conflict, the Chinese were engaged to their maximum and we had much more we could have done. (without using nukes either.)

What should have happened then was a united Korea with the Yalu as it's northern border.

Wow, we would also have a nuclear annihilated peninsula and an eternal war with most of Asia and Russia. MacArthur was an ego maniacal idiot that should have been replaced much, much sooner than he was.

Who is going to detonate the first nuke??

You think they still aren't making war on us, what world do you live in?

When would you have dismissed MacArthur, before or after Inchon??

"I predict that large-scale amphibious operations will never occur again."
Truman's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Omar N. Bradley, October 1949

"We'll never have any more amphibious operations. That does away with the Marine Corps. And the Air Force can do anything the Navy can do nowadays, so that does away with the Navy."
Truman's Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson, to Admiral Richard L. Connally in 1949

I absolutely disagree with your characterization of MacArthur and I knew at least three men who knew him personally. One made whiskey for him and his officers in WWII and had two walled tents that he didn't have to pitch himself, one for him and one for his still and he didn't have to share his sleeping tent.

None of them thought MacArthur anything like the way unfarily depict him.



American Rhetoric: General Douglas MacArthur -- Farewell Address to Congress

This is a military estimate as to which I have yet to find a military leader who will take exception.
................................

While I was not consulted prior to the President's decision to intervene in support of the Republic of Korea, that decision from a military standpoint, proved a sound one, as we -- as I said, proved a sound one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces. Our victory was complete, and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior ground forces.

This created a new war and an entirely new situation, a situation not contemplated when our forces were committed against the North Korean invaders; a situation which called for new decisions in the diplomatic sphere to permit the realistic adjustment of military strategy.

Such decisions have not been forthcoming.

While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our ground forces into continental China, and such was never given a thought, the new situation did urgently demand a drastic revision of strategic planning if our political aim was to defeat this new enemy as we had defeated the old.

Apart from the military need, as I saw It, to neutralize the sanctuary protection given the enemy north of the Yalu, I felt that military necessity in the conduct of the war made necessary: first the intensification of our economic blockade against China; two the imposition of a naval blockade against the China coast; three removal of restrictions on air reconnaissance of China's coastal areas and of Manchuria; four removal of restrictions on the forces of the Republic of China on Formosa, with logistical support to contribute to their effective operations against the common enemy.

For entertaining these views, all professionally designed to support our forces committed to Korea and bring hostilities to an end with the least possible delay and at a saving of countless American and allied lives, I have been severely criticized in lay circles, principally abroad, despite my understanding that from a military standpoint the above views have been fully shared in the past by practically every military leader concerned with the Korean campaign, including our own Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I called for reinforcements but was informed that reinforcements were not available. I made clear that if not permitted to destroy the enemy built-up bases north of the Yalu, if not permitted to utilize the friendly Chinese Force of some 600,000 men on Formosa, if not permitted to blockade the China coast to prevent the Chinese Reds from getting succor from without, and if there were to be no hope of major reinforcements, the position of the command from the military standpoint forbade victory.
---------------------------

Efforts have been made to distort my position. It has been said, in effect, that I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a means of settling international disputes.
-------------------

But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end.

War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.

In war there is no substitute for victory.

There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.

"Why," my soldiers asked of me, "surrender military advantages to an enemy in the field?" I could not answer.

The tragedy of Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military action is confined to its territorial limits. It condemns that nation, which it is our purpose to save, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bombardment while the enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack and devastation.

Of the nations of the world, Korea alone, up to now, is the sole one which has risked its all against communism. The magnificence of the courage and fortitude of the Korean people defies description.

They have chosen to risk death rather than slavery. Their last words to me were: "Don't scuttle the Pacific!"

If there was an ego maniacal idiot in the equation, it was Harry S Truman. Not only that he was a sorry POS in every way!

The first time I ever rode a train, I went to hear MacArthur make that speech.

Does this comment;

The tragedy of Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military action is confined to its territorial limits. It condemns that nation, which it is our purpose to save, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bombardment while the enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack and devastation.

Remind you of anything???

Clue, 2,500,000 slaughtered after we withdrew from Indochina in disgrace.

More on that sorry POS Harry Truman:

The Inchon Invasion

President Truman, guided by his Cabinet and the JCS and a strong personal dislike of the USMC, had cut the Fleet Marine Force to 34,000 officers and men, giving a ground fighting strength of only six infantry battalions, and a total Corps strength of 74,279 officers and men. Eliminated were the two Marine divisions which would surely have enabled Eighth Army to meet and defeat the In Min Gun in the Pusan Perimeter. Corps strength was so reduced that the 3 battalions available for a provisional brigade only had two companies each.

Truman had so weakened the Corps that they could not man the third companies ... the elements of maneuver! The third companies did not join 5th Marines until after the second Naktong battle, and then mostly manned by reservists who had been driving buses and bagging at supermarkets barely weeks before.

As it turned out, the single Marine RCT which still was capable of rapid deployment effectively saved the Perimeter, and South Korea, with its valiant defeats of the NK in the Naktong battles. When Truman permitted calling up the Reserves, the Marines were once again ready for decisive counter-attack behind enemy lines.

BTW, you do know we never got back many of our POWs from that conflict???

Lay that all at the feet of the likes of Harry Truman, gutless wonder and appeaser of tyrants.

I'll go out on a limb and say that the NKPA has a more effective AA contingent than the Taliban.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I'll go out on a limb and say if I were calling the shots, I would use intelligence assets to determine the exact location of Kim Jong Il and put a tommahawk into his outhouse, timed to impact aproximately midsh!t and see what happened next.

If anyone wanted to make something of it I would say I thought he looked ill needed a dose of exlax!

Who's afraid of a bunch of goose steppers??

BTW, Il hasn't made a public appearance since the day after the findings of the torpedo attack took place, he's probably in a spider hole somewhere growing a beard.

The taliban doesn't drink why would they need AA

lol:

Kim Jong Il needs AA, it's been widely reported that he was drunk as a skunk during his recent China trip.

The whore on the right is the reason he has nukes, with Bubba Clinton's approval of course.

At least we are doing something though.

The Chosun Ilbo (English Edition): Daily News from Korea - U.S. to Clamp Down on Kim Jong-il's Slush Funds

 

[BigPapaVol]

I agree regarding MacArthur vs Truman, but he was still the military commander who answered to civilian authority and was a subordinate to the president.

I don't understand your comment that China was tapped out. They could have sent hordes into the peninsula forever and were never going to allow a pro US regime to live next door. That said, they're all fortunate that Ike wasn't yet president. His diplomacy was a different breed. He would have toed that line at the Yalu and held hard via nuke threat.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[MontereyVol]

Who is going to detonate the first nuke??

You think they still aren't making war on us, what world do you live in?

When would you have dismissed MacArthur, before or after Inchon??

I was referring to your argument of the Korean conflict MacArthur was involved in. Since at the time no one had the Nuke but us, I would be safe in assuming we (the US) would have dropped the first (of many) nukes.

MacArthur (and Al Gores Daddy) was a big proponent of creating a nuclear curtain along the China/Korea border. that's of course is after the fact that MacArthur even believed the Chinese were involved, even after the Marines were screaming to the command they were being overrun, even after what most historians agree was the modern equivalent of the battle of Thermopylae.

I absolutely disagree with your characterization of MacArthur and I knew at least three men who knew him personally. One made whiskey for him and his officers in WWII and had two walled tents that he didn't have to pitch himself, one for him and one for his still and he didn't have to share his sleeping tent.

None of them thought MacArthur anything like the way unfarily depict him.

Well thats a cute story of the drinking habits of the Moron but they are irrelevant to the argument. Nor are they unique to any command station in any war ever fought by mankind. Of course the guy who made his whiskey (REMF) would praise him. Why not look to see what the troops who served under him said? I'm sure you can find a few who thought he was a saint but the majority thought he was a coward and a flat out bad commander.

American Rhetoric: General Douglas MacArthur -- Farewell Address to Congress



If there was an ego maniacal idiot in the equation, it was Harry S Truman. Not only that he was a sorry POS in every way!

The first time I ever rode a train, I went to hear MacArthur make that speech.

Does this comment;



Remind you of anything???

Clue, 2,500,000 slaughtered after we withdrew from Indochina in disgrace.

More on that sorry POS Harry Truman:

The Inchon Invasion

MacArthur was well known for his ability to be a politician so I will concede the point that you love people like Obama who have shown nothing but give heartfelt speeches.

BTW, you do know we never got back many of our POWs from that conflict???

Lay that all at the feet of the likes of Harry Truman, gutless wonder and appeaser of tyrants.

Or maybe Truman had a better grasp of the situation than you do. Do I need to copy and paste a thousand articles showing you MacArthur ineptitude? Better yet why don't you show me something where he strategically or tactically beat anyone who wasn't already mortally wounded by someone else doing.

I'll go out on a limb and say if I were calling the shots, I would use intelligence assets to determine the exact location of Kim Jong Il and put a tommahawk into his outhouse, timed to impact aproximately midsh!t and see what happened next.

Good luck with that, no one has thought of it before and our intelligence is infallible.

 

[gsvol]

Maybe it's me, as I've got a 3 month old little boy and have been kind of out of it, but I'm surprised at the lack of press this is getting. Obviously the oil spill is important, but man, this seems to be a pretty major destabalization of the Korean peninsula... Are you guys seeing as much on this in the news as you would expect?

It was an obvious and premeditated act of war, plain and simple.

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis.“
- David Rockefeller, Club of Rome executive manager

"The task of saving the earth's environment must and will become the central organizing principle of the post-Cold War world."
Senator Al Gore Putting People First 1992

"The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order."
Mikail Gorbechev

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
- Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

Gorbachev, Maurice Strong and Al Gore "The Three Musketeers" of the environmental movement.

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.”
- Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
- Ted Turner, founder of CNN and major ($1b) UN donor

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony, climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.“
-Christine Stewart, fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

"Climate change is real. Not only is it real, it’s here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon – the man-made natural disaster.“
- Barack Obama

Satelite night photo of Korea.

To a lesser degree and it's absurd to compare NK arty to afghan camel riders.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I wasn't comparing forces, I was comparing terrain Mr absurdo!

You said:

Our air forces are reasonably effective, but mountainous terrain is a different animal than the desert, which is perfect for our capabilities.

And I asked if smart bombs don't work in the mountains of Afghanistan.

I wasn't comparing forces but if that is the case then how could we bomb Serbia for months on end and only lose one plane.

You think the NKs better armed than the Serbs??

I think not!

If we really meant business North Korean artillary wouldn't survive even one day.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I wasn't comparing forces, I was comparing terrain Mr absurdo!

You said:



And I asked if smart bombs don't work in the mountains of Afghanistan.

I wasn't comparing forces but if that is the case then how could we bomb Serbia for months on end and only lose one plane.

You think the NKs better armed than the Serbs??

I think not!

If we really meant business North Korean artillary wouldn't survive even one day.

I was comparing tactics. I can tell you have no idea when you try to compare Serb forces to NK. The amount of artillery in NK dwarfs the Serbs. The tunnel system and hiding in mountains is even more. The DMZ and Pyongyang have the most heavily concentrated Air Defense network in the world. We'd be accurate in the mountains only to the extent that the bad guys make themselves available. They're better at not doing so than everyone else.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[gsvol]

I agree regarding MacArthur vs Truman, but he was still the military commander who answered to civilian authority and was a subordinate to the president.

I don't understand your comment that China was tapped out. They could have sent hordes into the peninsula forever and were never going to allow a pro US regime to live next door. That said, they're all fortunate that Ike wasn't yet president. His diplomacy was a different breed. He would have toed that line at the Yalu and held hard via nuke threat.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Take another look at Mac's farewell speech.

Those hordes needed continuous resupplies and reinforcements, they were expending maximum effort and willing to make it a standoff in the end.

The CIA had told Mac the Chinese wouldn't enter the war, that's why he wasn't prepared for that and the Chinese initially had success.

If Mac could have bombed their supply lines and staging areas he could have driven Chinese forces out fairly soon.

That is why he resigned/was relieved, he said Truman put him in a no win situation.

Same thing happened in Vietnam, we never loast a major battle, Tet was a huge failure for them but was played as a big win for them in the America media.

Our Vietnam war strategy was a no win political battle plan, that's why we didn't win.

China has allowed pro US regimes in Taiwan, Japan and the Philipines, are those not 'next door?'

I was referring to your argument of the Korean conflict MacArthur was involved in. Since at the time no one had the Nuke but us, I would be safe in assuming we (the US) would have dropped the first (of many) nukes.

There would have been no nukes dropped, the threat of nukes would have been enough.

Even if we had dropped nukes I doubt we would have ever killed 40 million Chinese as Mao did.

MacArthur (and Al Gores Daddy) was a big proponent of creating a nuclear curtain along the China/Korea border. that's of course is after the fact that MacArthur even believed the Chinese were involved, even after the Marines were screaming to the command they were being overrun, even after what most historians agree was the modern equivalent of the battle of Thermopylae.

Academia is the last bastion of socialists also, plenty of those historians lean way left of the truth.

Washington kept assuring him they knew the Chinese wouldn't cross the border, I think we've learned our lesson by now, you can't believe Washington anymore about anything.

Well thats a cute story of the drinking habits of the Moron but they are irrelevant to the argument. Nor are they unique to any command station in any war ever fought by mankind. Of course the guy who made his whiskey (REMF) would praise him. Why not look to see what the troops who served under him said? I'm sure you can find a few who thought he was a saint but the majority thought he was a coward and a flat out bad commander.

I knew a guy who dated his secretary also, he liked Douglas, a real gentleman.

My uncle and my next door neighbor served under Mac,
I have never heard from any soldier who thought Mac was a coward or a bad commander.

MacArthur was well known for his ability to be a politician so I will concede the point that you love people like Obama who have shown nothing but give heartfelt speeches.

lol:

Comparing Mac and teleprompter, now that's a real hoot.

If you really think Barry is speaking from the heart, then God help you.

Or maybe Truman had a better grasp of the situation than you do. Do I need to copy and paste a thousand articles showing you MacArthur ineptitude? Better yet why don't you show me something where he strategically or tactically beat anyone who wasn't already mortally wounded by someone else doing.

1. Do that, I'd like to read your thousand articles, unless you are going to produce a bunch of silly crap from the likes of the NY Slimes.

2. I already did that when I produced the link concerning the landing at Inchon.

My next door neighbor trained as a frogman with the capability of swimming great distances underwater, towing 60 pounds of gear but because of Mac's brilliant succes he just walked ashore on dry land.

Good luck with that, no one has thought of it before and our intelligence is infallible.

I wouldn't be talking about CIA disinformation, our military satelites should already have the precise loacation of every artillary battery in NK. After all that's what we were talking about, could NK ravage the south with artillery for as long as they wanted or could we take out those positions fairly quickly?? I lean toward the latter scenario.

Of course the satelite capability might not last forever, the Chinese have already proven with the technology they recieved from that traitor Bubba Clinton that they can hit a satelite in orbit with one of their missiles.

 

[Daddy Gee]

Our Vietnam war strategy was a no win political battle plan, that's why we didn't win.

do you all think that this has gotten better or worse in Iraq/Afghanistan ... or the same?

 

[gsvol]

I was comparing tactics. I can tell you have no idea when you try to compare Serb forces to NK. The amount of artillery in NK dwarfs the Serbs. The tunnel system and hiding in mountains is even more. The DMZ and Pyongyang have the most heavily concentrated Air Defense network in the world. We'd be accurate in the mountains only to the extent that the bad guys make themselves available. They're better at not doing so than everyone else.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No doubt what you say is true, still though, they would be in a world of hurt if they tried to advance across the DMZ. We have made some advances in 'bunker buster' munitions also.

Are you familiar with the 'seven Ps' principle??

 

[MontereyVol]

There would have been no nukes dropped, the threat of nukes would have been enough.

Even if we had dropped nukes I doubt we would have ever killed 40 million Chinese as Mao did.

You need to keep reading up on history as there was a huge push to use nukes once the higher-ups learned the Chinese were flooding over the border. Look at the history of Gore Sr. during the conflict.

To this day no one knows the amount of Chinese that crossed the border. It was a lot, the men of Fox company can tell you they never fired on a NK soldier of any kind on Fox Hill.

Academia is the last bastion of socialists also, plenty of those historians lean way left of the truth.

Washington kept assuring him they knew the Chinese wouldn't cross the border, I think we've learned our lesson by now, you can't believe Washington anymore about anything.

not sure where this argument is coming from but I will say academia is not the last bastion of a socialist nor is it of any bastion. Ideology is what they espouse.

I knew a guy who dated his secretary also, he liked Douglas, a real gentleman.

My uncle and my next door neighbor served under Mac,
I have never heard from any soldier who thought Mac was a coward or a bad commander.

Maybe if you weren't the cool kid thats friends with the Generals staff and asked anybody who had anything to do with actually being a part of the war I would give your argument any credence?

lol:

Comparing Mac and teleprompter, now that's a real hoot.

If you really think Barry is speaking from the heart, then God help you.

I think Obama speaks from the same place MacArthur did. Generally speaking from what I hear Obama is a real gentleman as well and I know a lot of people who serve under him.

1. Do that, I'd like to read your thousand articles, unless you are going to produce a bunch of silly crap from the likes of the NY Slimes.

2. I already did that when I produced the link concerning the landing at Inchon.

My next door neighbor trained as a frogman with the capability of swimming great distances underwater, towing 60 pounds of gear but because of Mac's brilliant succes he just walked ashore on dry land.

1. I will do better and just recco a book for you to read at your pleasure. 'The Last Stand of Fox Company' by Bob Drury and Tom Clavin. Its kept simple enough so you may understand. Or maybe you just like to watch TV, well I cant say I've watched the series on HBO called 'The Pacific' but the book is pretty good and I know Ambrose had an axe to grind when it came to MacArthur.

2. Golly Gee, no SEAL has ever been able to walk ashore because a military action cleared his way. Since people-we-know-dropping is so cool around here I can tell you that I work with a few hundred of them and not a single one gives two ****es about MacArthur.
[/QUOTE]

 

[MontereyVol]

I wouldn't be talking about CIA disinformation, our military satelites should already have the precise loacation of every artillary battery in NK. After all that's what we were talking about, could NK ravage the south with artillery for as long as they wanted or could we take out those positions fairly quickly?? I lean toward the latter scenario.

Of course the satelite capability might not last forever, the Chinese have already proven with the technology they recieved from that traitor Bubba Clinton that they can hit a satelite in orbit with one of their missiles.

Those artillery platforms are not stationary and their opening salvo would be devastating to the South (and US) by the time we responded they will have packed up and moved. The key would be to taking out any and all AA and then have fighters on station to hit the artillery when it fires again. Our fighting stance is what hurts us in this scenario since we do not fire until fired upon.

If the Chinese hit a satellite, and thats a big IF, they would also need to hit more than one as we do not rely solely on one satellite for all exercises and we can adjust to what is available. They would also have to take out the GPS satellites which would bring the rest of the world into the fight and damage themselves in the process. I highly doubt China would do this. I don't doubt they will enter the war much the same way they did before hoping for a better outcome.

 

[gsvol]

do you all think that this has gotten better or worse in Iraq/Afghanistan ... or the same?

The situation and circumstances have changed a great deal, not much has changed in our policy imo.

The tactics of the enemies have changed in that their influence is far more clandestine and meant to fly under the radar.

In Iraq we had forces coming in from Syria but that changed drastically after the Israelies bombed the Syrian nuclear site. BTW those nuclear works were moved there from Iraq just prior to our invasion.

The Iranians have been promoting violence by using undercover Republican Guard assets in Iraq by way of munitions and funding.

We've always known that terrorist insurgents were aided and abeted from Saudi Arabia but until just recently there was no indication the Saudi government actually had anything to do with that.

Iran is giving santuary to al Qaeda and even has training camps for Taliban forces that fight against us in Afghanistan.

The main sanctuary for the Taliban is Pakistan but unlike China and North Vietnam, the Pakistani government is taking action against our enemy, at least ostensibly.

With all those facts coming into play, I would say 'better' for the most part.

You need to keep reading up on history as there was a huge push to use nukes once the higher-ups learned the Chinese were flooding over the border. Look at the history of Gore Sr. during the conflict.

What historian are you talking about, Howard Zinn??

Gore Sr was in the pocket of the communists his whole carreer, pure political posturing on his part.

To this day no one knows the amount of Chinese that crossed the border. It was a lot, the men of Fox company can tell you they never fired on a NK soldier of any kind on Fox Hill.

Yes but they were stopped cold.

We could have driven them back all the way to China if we had allowed MacArthur to do so.

No one denies the Chinese sent massive amounts of troops across the border, a clear act of war against America that was met with wet noodle resistance form the democrats in power in Washington who have been working to create socialist America since 1913 at least.

not sure where this argument is coming from but I will say academia is not the last bastion of a socialist nor is it of any bastion. Ideology is what they espouse.

They espouse the ideology of socialism.

Maybe if you weren't the cool kid thats friends with the Generals staff and asked anybody who had anything to do with actually being a part of the war I would give your argument any credence?

I don't know and furthermone don't give a rat's ass.

I think Obama speaks from the same place MacArthur did. Generally speaking from what I hear Obama is a real gentleman as well and I know a lot of people who serve under him.

lol:

Good for you, we will never agree.

1. I will do better and just recco a book for you to read at your pleasure. 'The Last Stand of Fox Company' by Bob Drury and Tom Clavin. Its kept simple enough so you may understand. Or maybe you just like to watch TV, well I cant say I've watched the series on HBO called 'The Pacific' but the book is pretty good and I know Ambrose had an axe to grind when it came to MacArthur.

I'm well aware of the Chinese push and some of the atrocities they committed.

I knew a lady who wrote the biography of a man who did some time in Leavenworth after the 'police action' as the dimcraps like to call it, for killing Chinese POWs.

He and his patrol came upon some Americans who had been captured, wrapped in barbed wire, tortured and then bayonetted, shortly afterward they caught up with and captured some Chinese soldiers and they knew they were the same ones who had just performed the barbarity against their fellow soldiers, so after disarming them the lined them up and gunned them down.

Maybe that is simple enough for you to understand, oh brilliant one.

2. Golly Gee, no SEAL has ever been able to walk ashore because a military action cleared his way. Since people-we-know-dropping is so cool around here I can tell you that I work with a few hundred of them and not a single one gives two ****es about MacArthur.

There were no SEALs then, he was a forerunner of what came to be the SEALs.

As a matter of fact my neighbor wasn't in the Navy, he was in the army and the SEALs can attribute their very existance to the foresight of MacArthur very unlike the faulty philosophy of Truman and company.

"We'll never have any more amphibious operations. That does away with the Marine Corps. And the Air Force can do anything the Navy can do nowadays, so that does away with the Navy."
Truman's Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson, to Admiral Richard L. Connally in 1949

Good for your SEALs but your guarantee of anything means absolutely nothing to me, I don't believe a word you say, you have less than zero credibility with me.

I've known several SEALs myself and not one of them has ever has badmouthed Mac to me.

Bottom line is that Truman was a coward without a hair on his ass while Mac was willing to carry through and win with proper authorization.

Those artillery platforms are not stationary and their opening salvo would be devastating to the South (and US) by the time we responded they will have packed up and moved. The key would be to taking out any and all AA and then have fighters on station to hit the artillery when it fires again. Our fighting stance is what hurts us in this scenario since we do not fire until fired upon.

So you say.

Good point about our fighting stance.

What do you think their response would be if we went in and took our property, the USS Pueblo and brought it home??

If the Chinese hit a satellite, and thats a big IF, they would also need to hit more than one as we do not rely solely on one satellite for all exercises and we can adjust to what is available. They would also have to take out the GPS satellites which would bring the rest of the world into the fight and damage themselves in the process. I highly doubt China would do this. I don't doubt they will enter the war much the same way they did before hoping for a better outcome.

So now you say our intelligence assets have some sort of value?

 

[BoseefusTheVol]

With all those facts coming into play, I would say 'better' for the most part.

9 years in that God forsaken hellhole and that douche bag is still alive in some cave... yep it's been :good!:

 

[gsvol]

9 years in that God forsaken hellhole and that douche bag is still alive in some cave... yep it's been :good!:

Except that you have no idea where Usama bin Laden may be, he could be living it up on the French Riviera for all you know.

Much of the family he had in Afghanistan when we went in surfaced in Iran not so long ago.

Meanwhile a muslim whose father was very close to bin Laden's second in command proposes to build a thirteen story mosque across the street from ground zero.

And if truth weren't stranger than fiction enough, most liberals support the building of that slap in the face mosque in the name of religious tolerance as if fundamental islam is going to change it's tune after fourteen hundred years of naked agression.

 

[DC Vol]

Except that you have no idea where Usama bin Laden may be, he could be living it up on the French Riviera for all you know.

Much of the family he had in Afghanistan when we went in surfaced in Iran not so long ago.

Meanwhile a muslim whose father was very close to bin Laden's second in command proposes to build a thirteen story mosque across the street from ground zero.

And if truth weren't stranger than fiction enough, most liberals support the building of that slap in the face mosque in the name of religious tolerance as if fundamental islam is going to change it's tune after fourteen hundred years of naked agression.

Citation needed here. And don't link some neocon idiocy.

It's 2 blocks away, man. Also, GZ isn't a "holy site"... last I checked.

 

[DC Vol]

Those artillery platforms are not stationary and their opening salvo would be devastating to the South (and US) by the time we responded they will have packed up and moved. The key would be to taking out any and all AA and then have fighters on station to hit the artillery when it fires again. Our fighting stance is what hurts us in this scenario since we do not fire until fired upon.

If the Chinese hit a satellite, and thats a big IF, they would also need to hit more than one as we do not rely solely on one satellite for all exercises and we can adjust to what is available. They would also have to take out the GPS satellites which would bring the rest of the world into the fight and damage themselves in the process. I highly doubt China would do this. I don't doubt they will enter the war much the same way they did before hoping for a better outcome.

The only thing that would concern me is the level of counter ELINT/SIGINT (ECM/ECCM) capabilities which unfortunately wouldn't be unveiled until the opening of conflict. The only problem is mobilization of that effort if not already in place as a contingency. I know the Navy now has EA-18s in place that are far more capable than the EA-6s.

And you're 100% correct. The overarching flaw in our OOB is something that won't change at the opening of conflict. That's only as a reactionary OOB. They'll get 2 full salvos in... and that's about it.

I honestly doubt China would get involved as they have far more to lose now than they did in the 50s.

 

[MontereyVol]

What historian are you talking about, Howard Zinn??

Gore Sr was in the pocket of the communists his whole carreer, pure political posturing on his part.

You have your facts wrong, I suggest you read a little more about his involvment in the whole NK affair. MacArthur and AL Senior wanted Nukes dropped along the border and it came close to happening.

Yes but they were stopped cold.

We could have driven them back all the way to China if we had allowed MacArthur to do so.

No one denies the Chinese sent massive amounts of troops across the border, a clear act of war against America that was met with wet noodle resistance form the democrats in power in Washington who have been working to create socialist America since 1913 at least.

The guys I am talking about were Marines the Army on the other side of the Chosin Reservoir could not have chased tail any further than the front of their faces.

For you to act like what the men of Fox Hill or anyone else in that conflict was considered a "wet noodle resistance" tells me all I need to know about you and your supposed superiority of knowledge around here.

They espouse the ideology of socialism.

No crap, I just stated that.

I'm well aware of the Chinese push and some of the atrocities they committed.

I knew a lady who wrote the biography of a man who did some time in Leavenworth after the 'police action' as the dimcraps like to call it, for killing Chinese POWs.

He and his patrol came upon some Americans who had been captured, wrapped in barbed wire, tortured and then bayonetted, shortly afterward they caught up with and captured some Chinese soldiers and they knew they were the same ones who had just performed the barbarity against their fellow soldiers, so after disarming them the lined them up and gunned them down.

Maybe that is simple enough for you to understand, oh brilliant one.

What was his name?

There were no SEALs then, he was a forerunner of what came to be the SEALs.

As a matter of fact my neighbor wasn't in the Navy, he was in the army and the SEALs can attribute their very existance to the foresight of MacArthur very unlike the faulty philosophy of Truman and company.

Great story for some certain reason i am calling BS on this story.

Good for your SEALs but your guarantee of anything means absolutely nothing to me, I don't believe a word you say, you have less than zero credibility with me.

I've known several SEALs myself and not one of them has ever has badmouthed Mac to me.

Bottom line is that Truman was a coward without a hair on his ass while Mac was willing to carry through and win with proper authorization.

Why wouldn't I have any creditability with you? Now you can go tell me people on another blog how you know someone in the system now. and make up some cutesy little story that anyone actually in the system would know your full of ****e.

So you say.

Good point about our fighting stance.

What do you think their response would be if we went in and took our property, the USS Pueblo and brought it home??

I would think it was a colossal waste of time.

So now you say our intelligence assets have some sort of value?

I never said they didn't, it just depends on the intel and how it was received.

 

[MontereyVol]

The only thing that would concern me is the level of counter ELINT/SIGINT (ECM/ECCM) capabilities which unfortunately wouldn't be unveiled until the opening of conflict. The only problem is mobilization of that effort if not already in place as a contingency. I know the Navy now has EA-18s in place that are far more capable than the EA-6s.

And you're 100% correct. The overarching flaw in our OOB is something that won't change at the opening of conflict. That's only as a reactionary OOB. They'll get 2 full salvos in... and that's about it.

I honestly doubt China would get involved as they have far more to lose now than they did in the 50s.

Well Bush changed that doctrine with the Iraq War. I doubt Obama would deviate from it though.

Have no doubt the Chinese will be involved. Nothing would horrify them more than a unified Korea as an American ally right on their border. That are happy with the situation as is.

 

[gsvol]

Citation needed here. And don't link some neocon idiocy.

It's 2 blocks away, man. Also, GZ isn't a "holy site"... last I checked.

So the new Islamic indoctrination center will be a "holy site?"

600 ft is two blocks?? It was near enought to ground zero (an offensive term to me) that the previous building had to be torn down. How about if he just put it in Mecca where no Christian, Jew or any other non muslim is allowed to set foot??

I recently listened to what a former muslim convert to Christiantianity had to say and he said that what Faisal Abdul Rauf says in English and what he says in Arabic are two differnent things, which is no surprise to me.

Is this neocon idiocy??

Pajamas Media The Ground Zero Mosque Developer: Muslim Brotherhood Roots, Radical Dreams

If so, I will come back with something that may meet your holy liberal approval.

I suppose also you are in favor of the facility?

I can't understand why any American wouldn't consider this a slap in the face, adding insult to injury.

Calling it the Cordoba House is doubly insulting.

You're good at interpreting liberal double speak, maybe you can explain it to me.

BTW, I did notice the city council approved the project.