What are the arguments for and against US forces in Korea?

[Drake Tungsten]

I mean what's the point of you saying China has a grand strategic plan, but then saying you're not going to mention any details.

How exactly would anyone know the details of the Chinese strategic plan, outside of the Chinese leadership? We don't know the details. Hell, it's probably not that detailed anyway, seeing as its a plan that reaches decades into the future. You can divine general intentions, however, by observing Chinese actions and statements.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

and not give an answer. =[

my solution? engage them. tell them we're through with that ****, and if they want any more aid then they better damn well do it on our terms, or we'll let them starve. let them no we won't pull any punches: if they hit us with a nuke, we annihialate them--if they decide to test one of their nukes, test one of ours--in the pacific, near the northern side of the peninsula. they will see who they're messing with.
once they agree to disarm, twist the knife. force them to open up, force them to create more special economic zones. push them towards a temporary commonwealth with skorea, in which borders are open and thus trade and internal development will be spurred by primarily korean sources.
once nkorea is no longer in the stone age, eliminate the dear leader and his cronies from power. stalinism has no place on that peninsula.

ok thats a start! so call their bluff and roll the dice. atleast its manly.

[GePap]

Drakeky boy, little boy, before you call anyone an idiot, it would be nice for you to understand what a "fact" is.

Do you have proof of this Chinese plan? Is there some document, some pieec of sacred Chinese writing, some scroll of policy lying somewhere, some article in the Communist party manifesto, or the Consitution where this plan is laid out? If not, you have no way to prove anything, and to call it a fact is, well, wrong.

So, beside learning manners, learn basic definitions.

You have a theory about what China wants. It is a common theory. It is not a theory I think valid, for it assumes much about Politics that I think is absurd (like the notion of "states" having long term plans). Then there is the diffewrence between Hegemon and being secure. Now, being hegemo makes you secure, but you do not have to be hegemon to be so. China certainl wants to be the strong gest state among its neighbors. That does not euqate to some great geo-political plan, and China's relative non-importance to issues that do not affact neighbors or states close to being so is part of my evidence.

[Drake Tungsten]

Oh, so now you're saying that China's plan is to make Japan its client state. Didn't you say something about how that is an absurb scenario?

Why am I wasting my time on you? It's really sad that I don't have anything better to do.

[Drake Tungsten]

China certainl wants to be the strong gest state among its neighbors. That does not euqate to some great geo-political plan, China's relative non-importance to issues that do not affact neighbors or states close to being so is part of my evidence.

So you're saying that because China is only interested in Asia (the largest and most populous continent on Earth), their plans don't qualify as a "geo-political plan"?



Maybe you're the one who needs to learn some definitions.

[Q Classic]

Oh, so now you're saying that China's plan is to make Japan its client state. Didn't you say something about how that is an absurb scenario?

wrong! having china desire to acheive hegemony no more makes it want to have japan as a client state as america's hegemony makes canada, germany, britain, france, or italy its client state.

I actually didn't make any suggestions. if u thot I did sorry. I didn't.

i'm actually referring to the numerous tiffs we had in the past, not this current one. i'm well aware you haven't proposed a plan since i pretty much destroyed your idea to give japan nukes and repeated denials that it would cause an east asian arms race.

Do you have proof of this Chinese plan? Is there some document, some pieec of sacred Chinese writing, some scroll of policy lying somewhere, some article in the Communist party manifesto, or the Consitution where this plan is laid out? If not, you have no way to prove anything, and to call it a fact is, well, wrong.

if you're looking for that, you're sorely misguided and looking way in the wrong place. glance at china's behaviour, and you'll see inklings of its 'master plan'.

Then there is the diffewrence between Hegemon and being secure. Now, being hegemo makes you secure, but you do not have to be hegemon to be so. China certainl wants to be the strong gest state among its neighbors. That does not euqate to some great geo-political plan, and China's relative non-importance to issues that do not affact neighbors or states close to being so is part of my evidence.

red china definitely subscribes to realism. apparently, they adore mearsheimer, gepap. you know as well as i do how convincing he can be when he's lecturing. that's what china is seeking, and granted, it's not a "long term plan" cooked up by a cabal and written down. it's a plan shown by their behaviour and actions, nothing more.

[LoneWolf]

We should be out ASAP. We have no national interest there, now that we won the Cold War. The SK's and the NK's deserve each other.

[Drake Tungsten]

Drakeky boy, little boy

Just for the record, I'm only 19 days younger than you. Don't see how that qualifies me as a "little boy."

Honestly, you and your definitions...

[Drake Tungsten]

if you're looking for that, you're sorely misguided and looking way in the wrong place. glance at china's behaviour, and you'll see inklings of its 'master plan'.

I figured this was obvious, but I guess it isn't.

[Q Classic]

We should be out ASAP. We have no national interest there, now that we won the Cold War. The SK's and the NK's deserve each other.

and just roll over and let china become regional hegemon? fat chance.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
[q]

I actually didn't make any suggestions. if u thot I did sorry. I didn't.

i'm actually referring to the numerous tiffs we had in the past, not this current one. i'm well aware you haven't proposed a plan since i pretty much destroyed your idea to give japan nukes and repeated denials that it would cause an east asian arms race.

boy u can't let things die. the point was to start an arms race. china has nukes and north korea is close. no1 else does. so basically the two countries we hate have em. and every country we don't mind(taiwan, japan, south korea). we've told to not get them.

but really plz for the luv of god don't drag me back into this. I let it die, u r the phillibuster of arguers.

[LoneWolf]

Qcubed-They are not already? And why is it our responsibility to prevent it?

[GePap]

Chronological age Drake is not a guarantee of maturity, as your behavior shows.

See, let me explains something, specially about those FR pieces: they are annalysis articles. That means one author, using their opinions, prejudices one way or the other, and information they can get, put together a story about how they think the world is. Such a piece is NOT FACT, but theory. One is free to agree or disagree based on whether you support their opinions, prejudices, or the validity of their information.

Now, the use of a Liberal education is to gain the ability to make these annalysis on your own... maybe you should try that sometimes, instead of taking the ideas of others, treating them as fact, when they are not, and then insulting those that "gasp", dare to try to make their own ideas! (cause we know how dangeorus ones own ideas can be, no?)

As for your other comment: China is not even fully interested in all of Asia, specially far western Asia. China's sheer size does give it interests in most of the continent.
Q:

I actually have never been very convinced by mearshimer (call me more of a Wendt type), and his whole China lectures were the least convincing, so if the Chinese love that sort of thing, well.....

You say look at China's actions: exactly, which actions? China is a diplomatic midget for most of the world, they can;t figure out how to handle NK, they are trying to play all sides in South Asia, thier policy in Central asia is weak, they haven't made much noise about the South China sea recently (in various years), so I do fail to see any master plan, and the status of China's leadership at this point also makes the idea of some grand plan sort of ridiculous: the Chinese changed economic policy 180% just 30 years ago, and yet some great master plan was in place? At a minimum, what they seek is never to be humilitaed again: that does not count as a master plan, not in such a vague form.

[Drake Tungsten]

And why is it our responsibility to prevent it?

It's not our "responsibility", but it is the stated policy of the United States to prevent any single state from gaining a hegemonic position in Asia. I don't really know if the U.S. can't prevent China from dominating the region, but I'm relatively sure we're going to try.

[LoneWolf]

Well, our "stated policy" can be changed if it is no longer in our interests. I presume that that is what we are talking about.