If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hindustan Times)   Kim Jong-Un: A mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a windtalker wrapped in Scooby-Doo episode wrapped in bacon   (hindustantimes.com) divider line 175
    More: Interesting, Scooby Doo, bacon  
•       •       •

7633 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2013 at 8:50 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



175 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-05 11:01:09 AM

hitlersbrain: He's a spoiled, crazy, chubby, stupid, harmless, boring little egomaniac who is being used as a paper tiger by news magazines, websites and governments to get attention and scare people. There, now you don't have to RTFA.


Maybe it is his cry for help. Maybe Rodman's visit reminded him of the good life he experienced in Switzerland and he'd like that for his family.
 
2013-04-05 11:01:55 AM

metallion: Best thing to do is air-drop food as far away from the leadership as possible.  Let the soldiers and the small villages be the ones who get fark-tons of food from the US and allies...

Make it interesting.  Spike it with viagra.

That would keep them occupied for a while.  Hopefully not over 4 hours at a stretch.. :)


Then the regime says, anyone seen eating the food will be sent to re-education camps, along with their entire families.
 
2013-04-05 11:04:25 AM
He likes amusement parks and Disney characters. It's like dealing with Michael Jackson.
 
2013-04-05 11:08:48 AM
I don't mind us posturing a little bit, but, when the day is done, doing nothing seems reasonable.
 
2013-04-05 11:08:55 AM

Deep Contact: He likes amusement parks and Disney characters. It's like dealing with Michael Jackson.


Depends on the Disney Character.

media.aintitcool.com
 
2013-04-05 11:11:38 AM

Summa cum loudly: RandomRandom: HMS_Blinkin:

That's the reason we haven't knocked these idiot's blocks off already.  Because the south put their capital in the wrong damn place.

THIS. We should have never allowed the 59th Parallel (or whatever damn Parallel it is)  to be the final Border. Should have pushed inland 50 Miles further before we signed the armistice in '53.

Of course, its easy to say that looking back 60 years....who knew at the time?


Anyone who knew what was really going on in Stalin's Russia.

/which sadly did not seem to include our propaganda-wielding media overlords
//or maybe it did, and the obviously inevitable result was a price they eagerly made the North Koreans pay to bolster their own authority at the expense of the capitalists
 
2013-04-05 11:17:15 AM

ransack.: Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: ooh! India?

India

Per Global Security:

1 China 1,600,000
2 South Korea 1,240,000
3 United States 1,125,000
4 India 1,120,000
5 North Korea 1,000,000
6 Israel 633,000
7 Pakistan 550,000
8 Russia 415,000
9 Vietnam 410,000
10 Turkey 400,000

wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.

Nah, we don't need as many troops since we've got the biggest bombs and awesome war machines.  An invasion of North Korea might require a draft.

Drafts are illegal now. -2/10


Active soldiers? That has not mattered since WWII. Missiles, Air strikes, naval artillery barrages and just good old automatic weapons make 'troops' pretty much inconsequential. Like grass to a lawn mower.
 
2013-04-05 11:18:15 AM

Devo: I don't mind us posturing a little bit, but, when the day is done, doing nothing seems reasonable.


You can't do -nothing- because it sends the message to the world that building nukes is okay. Now, whether or not you agree that sovereign nations should have the right to do whatever, including building nukes, is another issue entirely; this is specifically about US policy on the matter, which is that it is unacceptable.

Doing "nothing" here emboldens the likes of Iran.
 
2013-04-05 11:22:19 AM
 
2013-04-05 11:23:12 AM

hitlersbrain: ransack.: Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: 

Active soldiers? That has not mattered since WWII. Missiles, Air strikes, naval artillery barrages and just good old automatic weapons make 'troops' pretty much inconsequential. Like grass to a lawn mower.


Confucius say lawnmower get clogged when grass grow too high...
 
2013-04-05 11:26:09 AM

The Bestest: Doing "nothing" here emboldens the likes of Iran.


Well doing nothing here is more like "maintaining the choke-hold" than actually doing nothing. The fresh UN sanctions sparked this whole tantrum and the best thing to do once the punishment sparks a tantrum is leave the child be to work it off themselves.

But North Korea's a country, not a child, so instead of closing the door on them, we have to put up missile shields and call up reservists.
 
2013-04-05 11:28:44 AM

ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.


I'd like to see a citation for that.
 
2013-04-05 11:29:31 AM

I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.


The literal meaning part that is, not the horribly emabarrassing outcome....
 
2013-04-05 11:30:58 AM

I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.


Wikipedia for decimate

Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth".
 
2013-04-05 11:34:39 AM

I'm no expert but...: I'd like to see a citation for that.


The Romans invented it to punish legions that ran away from battle.

The soldiers had to draw lots. 1 in ten of them got a death sentence. The other nine had to beat the tenth one to death.

This left them with and army still at 90% strength and full of soldiers more afraid of their Roman leaders than a bunch of slaves.
 
2013-04-05 11:43:26 AM

ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.

Wikipedia for decimate

Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth".


"Unfortunately for the etymological purists, decimate comes from the Medieval Latin word decimatus, which means 'to tithe'. The word was then assigned retrospectively to the Roman practice of punishing every tenth soldier. "

From -> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy - one-tenth/
 
2013-04-05 11:47:11 AM

I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.

Wikipedia for decimate

Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth".

"Unfortunately for the etymological purists, decimate comes from the Medieval Latin word decimatus, which means 'to tithe'. The word was then assigned retrospectively to the Roman practice of punishing every tenth soldier. "

From -> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy - one-tenth/


lol no
 
2013-04-05 11:48:59 AM

ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.

Wikipedia for decimate

Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth".

"Unfortunately for the etymological purists, decimate comes from the Medieval Latin word decimatus, which means 'to tithe'. The word was then assigned retrospectively to the Roman practice of punishing every tenth soldier. "

From -> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy - one-tenth/

lol no


That's a healthy bit of embarrassment.  Do you need a break?
 
2013-04-05 11:49:42 AM

ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: ransack.: I'm no expert but...: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?

The literal meaning is to reduce something to 9/10 the size. This would be a horribly embarrassing outcome of a United States attacking North Korea scenario.

I'd like to see a citation for that.

Wikipedia for decimate

Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth".

"Unfortunately for the etymological purists, decimate comes from the Medieval Latin word decimatus, which means 'to tithe'. The word was then assigned retrospectively to the Roman practice of punishing every tenth soldier. "

From -> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/09/does-decimate-mean-destroy - one-tenth/

lol no


Why lol no?
 
2013-04-05 11:56:55 AM

HMS_Blinkin: That's actually a pretty common misconception. The vast majority of NK guns can't actually reach quite that far, and most of the artillery positions on the NK side of the DMZ are either out of range or too small for the big guns that are needed to hit Seoul.


That writeup talks of hits to "central Seoul".  Seoul is a big damn city, over 200 square miles.  The northern part of the city is well within range of much lesser guns.

Fire spreads. Incendiaries may be enough to burn down much of Seoul, depending on environmental conditions, and don't discount WMD.  If the NK military leadership truly know the score, they'll know they're definitely going to lose.  It will just be a matter of how much damage they can inflict on the way out.  Most nations would never dare use bio, chem or nuke weapons, most nations aren't North Korea.  Even shells filled with inert radiological material could deny access to large sections of Seoul, for years.

At a minimum, the northern portion of Seoul would probably look like Stalingrad within the first few hours of fighting.  Depending on environmental factors and whether the north used WMD's, it is well within the realm of possibility that the majority of Seoul could be made unlivable.

The South doesn't want that to happen to their capital city. Who would?  That's largely why North Korea still exists.
 
2013-04-05 11:56:59 AM

The Bestest: Devo: I don't mind us posturing a little bit, but, when the day is done, doing nothing seems reasonable.

You can't do -nothing- because it sends the message to the world that building nukes is okay. Now, whether or not you agree that sovereign nations should have the right to do whatever, including building nukes, is another issue entirely; this is specifically about US policy on the matter, which is that it is unacceptable.

Doing "nothing" here emboldens the likes of Iran.



My best guess is that no real military action by the US is going to happen. We aren't going to drop any bombs. We aren't going to attack any of their military targets. At most, we might see some sort of blockade. Is sending a message enough for us to go into another war? I'd say that is going to be a tough sell. Better get Colin Powell to do a powerpoint.
 
2013-04-05 12:11:36 PM
can i try?

seems to be decimate vs eliminate

if you say decimate is remove a tenth.. then the 1 million man army would be come 900,000  still a strong formidable force

if you say decimate is to reduce by a power of ten.  then the 1 million man army is now 100,000  reduced but not destroyed

if you say eliminate, then all the 1 million troops are gone and destroyed.
 
2013-04-05 12:15:56 PM
You guys should read the Olympus/Ilium pair of science-fiction novels.

Two of the characters have a hangup about proper use of the word "decimate".  One of them is a robot.  Hilarity ensues.
 
2013-04-05 12:15:56 PM
My Google-Fu is weak; at what percentage attrition is a combat unit typically considered, if not "destroyed", at least "combat ineffective"?

Obviously there's exceptions, like scenarios where there's only survival or annihilation, or when a unit's morale prematurely breaks.  Just looking for the general rule of thumb, and I don't think decimation is it.
 
2013-04-05 12:19:53 PM
What did Rodman say to that little boy?
 
2013-04-05 12:42:44 PM

orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?


That's right. We're all going to speak Korean soon anyway.
 
2013-04-05 12:44:56 PM

nekom: stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)

Little over a million troops, but old Soviet and Chinese equipment. Major fuel issues. They do, however, have a lot of artillery that could be pointed at Seoul. They absolutely can't win, and I'm inclined to believe U.S. intelligence estimates that their capacity to make war could be destroyed in mere hours, but it may not be pretty. And what happens to the ensuing power vacuum, that remains a big unknown. The U.S. will not occupy best Korea, we'll just knock their military down. I suppose worst Korea comes in then? Or China. Who knows.


terrain and weather is a much bigger factor in Korea Vs. the sandbox.  Any invasion might do well to circumvent the parts of the DMZ that are littered with landmines.  That said it's a big army but not well equipped or battle tested.  I get the feeling that the troops and command have a kind of Internet Tough Guy false sense of ability.
 
2013-04-05 12:45:39 PM

SurelyShirley: orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?

That's right. We're all going to speak Korean soon anyway.


Mao! Diddy Mao!
 
2013-04-05 12:45:55 PM
I'm glad that no one here is a General in the army. We'd be screwed since any planning would turn into a pointless debate about some mundane word.
 
2013-04-05 12:49:17 PM

Slartibartfaster: TV's Vinnie: Slartibartfaster: TV's Vinnie: China might not want to piss off their #1 debtor, who could use a war powers act to render all their debts to China null and void

They have already traded those with other nations, so if you null and void them you are going to piss off half the planet.

And your solution is......what? Let Fatty DingDongs get away with nuclear aggression?

nuclear threats, he has no ability to deliver and if he does others will smack him down
China could stop him with a timeout, if the USA gets involved it will be far more complicated


Dude, we invaded Iraq with less evidence! How come Fatso here is getting the kid gloves treatment?

How many more decades are we going to kiss their asses! Instead of sending them free money and food, how about we use that for our own citizens in need???!
 
2013-04-05 12:49:31 PM
Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun
 
2013-04-05 12:57:43 PM

Aar1012: I'm glad that no one here is a General in the army. We'd be screwed since any planning would turn into a pointless debate about some mundane word.


You don't understand the complexities of international relations. I NUKE YOU NOW!!! SOON I NUKE YOU!!! OHH YOU SOOOO SCARRRED! YOU GIVE ME GRAIN , I NUKE YOU LATER!!! YOU SHAKING IN YOUR BOOTS OOOOOOHH YOU AFRAID KOREA NUKE. YOU NOT NEED ADMIT. I KNOW YOU AFRAID!!! BEST KOREA SHOW YOU MERCY THIS TIME!
 
2013-04-05 12:58:40 PM

dukeblue219: Fireproof: Anyone asking about the size of the NK military needs to RTFA:

That graphic is VERY misleading. There's simply NO comparison between the 4,100 tanks the North supposedly has versus the 2,400 the South has. They would likely not face each other because the North doesn't have fuel to run them and if they did, American/Korean airpower would destroy them.

The idea that the North Koreans have more "combat aircraft" than the South is laughable if technically true. The North's most numerous fighter is the MiG-21 and they still have MiG-17's in the inventory. The South and the Americans have F-16's, F-15's, and F-22's which would decimate any force the North could even get off the ground.


And the large majority of their 1.2 million active troops are starving, sickly, weak, and untrained in anything but marching up and down the square.
 
2013-04-05 01:00:40 PM
Step 1. Ignore until weapons are fired.
Step2. Remove anything remotely close to a weapon that can reach the border.
Step3. Leave.
 
2013-04-05 01:05:25 PM
We have many generals with much decorations on chests...  You so scwewed Amewika!
 
2013-04-05 01:11:38 PM

Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun


It's almost as if... words can mean more than one thing!

Shocked, SHOCKED I am.
 
2013-04-05 01:17:00 PM

ransack.: lol no


Languages evolve. As an English-speaker, and I'm guessing a native-speaker at that, this is something of which you should be painfully aware considering the origins of your own language. Stop being a pedant.
 
2013-04-05 01:30:36 PM

Summa cum loudly: hitlersbrain: ransack.: Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: 

Active soldiers? That has not mattered since WWII. Missiles, Air strikes, naval artillery barrages and just good old automatic weapons make 'troops' pretty much inconsequential. Like grass to a lawn mower.

Confucius say lawnmower get clogged when grass grow too high...


Good luck with that. The tet offensive showed just how worthless numbers are and that was a long time ago.
 
2013-04-05 01:34:54 PM

Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun


Dude, you're arguing with a prescriptivist. He thinks it is the job of a tweed-clad English major somewhere to tell the rest of us who actually have things to say how to say them. If you've come to the realization that it is their job to describe the language that actually exists instead, just rejoice in the fact that you're a step ahead on the road to enlightenment and move on.
 
2013-04-05 01:38:02 PM

namegoeshere: Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun

It's almost as if... words can mean more than one thing!

Shocked, SHOCKED I am.


Aparently they can even mean the opposite.

Can we get some english majors in here?  This is the ONE countem ONE time in your farking lives that your farking major will mean jack diddle shiat to anybody so make use of it while you can.  This is your moment.
 
2013-04-05 01:41:51 PM
I thought it meant having a very small significant other.
 
2013-04-05 01:46:10 PM

orclover: namegoeshere: Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun

It's almost as if... words can mean more than one thing!

Shocked, SHOCKED I am.

Aparently they can even mean the opposite.


Yes. Imagine my surprise when I looked up "cleave."  To split or sever, especially along natural lines, AND to adhere tightly to. Opposite! This wacky language - you almost have to look at context to figure out what people really mean.
 
2013-04-05 01:48:51 PM

namegoeshere: ...AND to adhere tightly to.


Insert Firefly reference here.
 
2013-04-05 01:49:26 PM

italie: Step 1. Ignore until weapons are fired.
Step2. Remove anything remotely close to a weapon that can reach the border.
Step3. Leave.


You missed Steps 1b&c.
- Clean up smouldering remains of Seoul.
- Reboot South Korean economy without its dominant economic centre.

Best case models of the NK artillery assault leave Seoul 'only' as damaged as Sarajevo after the siege.
 
2013-04-05 01:51:42 PM

bighairyguy: dukeblue219: bighairyguy: On the ground, they have tons of tanks and artiliary too.

Their tanks are T-55s and similar. We're talking about the worst equipment Saddam had in the Gulf War, which was no match for US technology 22 years ago. US firepower would completely and utterly destroy their army. The only question is how long it would take and how many casualties the NK would inflict while they go down. Would their soldiers fight to the last man and hide in the mountains like the Japanese did in the Pacific, or would they give up just to get a hot meal once they see all their equipment blown to pieces?

I think our best strategy would be to carpet-bomb them with Big Macs.


Whoa...Lets not go crazy now.  We want to make peace with them, not kill them with diarrhea.
 
2013-04-05 01:58:07 PM

Fireproof: Anyone asking about the size of the NK military needs to RTFA:

[i.imgur.com image 650x1071]


Size has little to do with how good the army is.  If they throw away their guns because they don't want to fight, it doesn't matter how large it is.
 
2013-04-05 02:05:00 PM

orclover: namegoeshere: Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun

It's almost as if... words can mean more than one thing!

Shocked, SHOCKED I am.

Aparently they can even mean the opposite.

Can we get some english majors in here?  This is the ONE countem ONE time in your farking lives that your farking major will mean jack diddle shiat to anybody so make use of it while you can.  This is your moment.


What do you want? The classic definition is to kill every tenth soldier. The modern definition is to kill 8 or 9 out of ten.
 
2013-04-05 02:06:02 PM

namegoeshere: orclover: namegoeshere: Detinwolf: Definition of DECIMATE:
1: to select by lot and kill every tenth man of
2: to exact a tax of 10 percent from <poor as a decimated Cavalier - John Dryden>
3a : to reduce drastically especially in number <cholera decimated the population> b : to cause great destruction or harm to <firebombs decimated the city> <an industry decimated by recession> -
dec·i·ma·tion noun

It's almost as if... words can mean more than one thing!

Shocked, SHOCKED I am.

Aparently they can even mean the opposite.

Yes. Imagine my surprise when I looked up "cleave."  To split or sever, especially along natural lines, AND to adhere tightly to. Opposite! This wacky language - you almost have to look at context to figure out what people really mean.


goddam wittgensteinian..
 
2013-04-05 02:09:18 PM
Dumb question, but what are the odds NK is not mobilizing its armed forces because it expects to cause disarray with a WMD (chemical and nuclear) and conventional artillery barrage, long enough that it can actually mobilize ground forces while everyone else is staggered and yet to get a response?

Not that it's a good plan -- not saying that.  Just that I vaguely recall some Cold War plans involved "Bolt from the Blue" scenarios where mobilization was either nonexistent or minimal right up until hours before a massive strike that only included units that could immediately strike -- which would be air, artillery, WMD, and "sleeper" units.  Those would, in theory, allow the main ground forces to actually complete mobilization in the chaotic time immediately afterward.

This, of course, would require some serious first strike action, and the use of WMD would have to be just enough to keep the US uncertain as to whether they'd be able to respond in kind -- perhaps just chemical weapons and nukes are ready to go as blackmail?  Might be Fat Boy's only option presented to him as viable.
 
2013-04-05 02:15:26 PM

Comic Book Guy: I'm going to start dropping this in every NK thread, it's an excellent no-BS writeup on the military capabilities of the DPRK.  It's almost a year old now, but the conclusions reached here can be easily extended to the new hardware/nukes that they've shown they possess, the end result is the same.

http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-bet we en-rhetoric-and-reality/#introduction

One of the points made in there is that if the DPRK attempts to invade or cross the DMZ, they have to move however many hundreds of thousands of men through 3 well-defined paths that the SK's have had 50 years to map out, fortify, and build defenses around.  They would have to do this in a couple thousand thin-skinned vehicles, and in order to have any chance to overwhelm the enemy they would have to do it all at once, which means that the SK's would hear/see/feel them coming through either OP stations, satellite imagery, or ground sensors.  Also, a bunch of their artillery is hardened shelters, but must be uncovered from those shelters to fire accurately, then brought back in, and so on.

Long story short is that the DPRK has no effective logistical support for a campaign lasting longer than 2 weeks, much less 2 months.  If this turns out to be a shooting war, the regime is effectively finished.


Like zerglings against fortified high ground siege tanks, it will be a spectacular suicide march
 
Displayed 50 of 175 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report