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.

(Reuters)   Your Best Korean troll of the day for April 9, 2013: Pyongyang issues warning for all foreigners to evacuate Worst Korea immediately   (reuters.com) divider line 280
    More: News, Pyongyang, North Koreans, Kaesong, household goods, South Korean government, South Koreans, world leaders, trolls  
•       •       •

10407 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Apr 2013 at 2:53 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-09 12:05:38 PM

MythDragon: Why doesn't the NK military go in at feeding time, wrap the little bastard up in a rug, and chuck his ass in a river? Surely they are tired of his shiat. I am sure they enjoy living the perks of high ranking military, but they gotta know this eventualy will be bad news for everyone involved. I imagine one of them can 'retire' Kim, declare himself ruler, and open up lines of communication with the world starting with "Sorry we've been a bunch of assholes, but our people are starving. Please help us get to a level were we sustain ourselves, and we would love to join the rest of the world in harmony. Send in some inspectors if you want, just do what ever it takes to keep our people from dying"


Keep in mind, the NK military is likely the ones calling the shots and/or pushing the NK government to be dicks.  The generals get to live like kings.  They can't justify that unless the country is in a permanent war footing.

dittybopper: Also, it would be incredibly stupid and militarily inept to target the civilian population. You would first want to hit military targets. Hitting the civilian centers would be counter-productive: It pisses everyone off, and it doesn't significantly degrade the capabilities of your opponents. The *ONLY* exception to that would be a sort of watered-down "Mutually Assured Destruction" scheme, where you use the idea that you'd target civilian areas as a deterrent to invasion, *BUT* that's only viable if you have enough long range artillery to cause a significant amount of damage and casualties, and the DPRK really doesn't have that capability.


That, and you have to figure a lot of those troops have never fired that artillery piece in their life, a lot of the pieces haven't been fired ever or in decades...
 
2013-04-09 12:11:08 PM

universebetween: ontariolightning: @W7VOA: Yonhap quotes "multiple gov't sources" saying #ROK believes #DPRK "ready to launch missile" moved to east sea. #Korea

i was sitting here. really high. wondering how cool it would not be if china was secretly using north korea as a puppet to instigate war with the us. stupid nervous scared americans buy shiat. also it would pull us further into debt. after n.korea instigates war wit hthe south and we step in china doesnt have to fake pretense anymore and they can actually DEFEND north korea who they were already using as OFFENSE and then go on the offense themselves and take out whoever they want. maybe japan.


The only problem with that theory (from China's point of view anyway), is all our debt we sold to China would be null and void if we went to war together.

It might be the reason why we haven't given them food to shut them up yet. Going to war with China benefits America: no debt, manufacturing returns to the US/Mexico (a current trend), Obama gets warhawks on his side to push his agenda.
 
2013-04-09 12:16:10 PM
 

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: "We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things."-Chesty Puller


"Retreat Hell! We're just attacking in another direction." (Attributed to Major General Oliver P. Smith, USMC, Korea, December 1950.)
 
2013-04-09 12:23:33 PM

p4p3rm4t3: mbillips: p4p3rm4t3: universebetween: ontariolightning: @W7VOA: Yonhap quotes "multiple gov't sources" saying #ROK believes #DPRK "ready to launch missile" moved to east sea. #Korea

i was sitting here. really high. wondering how cool it would not be if china was secretly using north korea as a puppet to instigate war with the us. stupid nervous scared americans buy shiat. also it would pull us further into debt. after n.korea instigates war wit hthe south and we step in china doesnt have to fake pretense anymore and they can actually DEFEND north korea who they were already using as OFFENSE and then go on the offense themselves and take out whoever they want. maybe japan.

                                                                                                                                    THIS.

?? You're agreeing that really high people come up with stupid geopolitical theories?

China has helped DPRK by fighting with them against the US and South Korea before. They have also been keeping North Korea alive.
As stated up thread nothing happens unless China says so. Why is it stupid?


Because the current Chinese government and economic system bear absolutely no resemblance to 1950 China. China has no interest in fighting a war with anyone (Mao farking LOVED wars according to a recent biography, because they were exciting, and he was a thrill-seeker who didn't give a crap about people). China would like to claim and defend some resources in the South China sea, which is the source of much of their military posturing, but the only people they have real beefs with are their major trading partners. And their whole economic boom since dumping communist economics is based on trade. The only reason they prop up North Korea is to keep out a wave of starving immigrants, and because they don't want a prosperous democracy right on their border to give the Chinese people ideas.

That's why it's stupid.
 
2013-04-09 12:30:37 PM

shortymac: universebetween: ontariolightning: @W7VOA: Yonhap quotes "multiple gov't sources" saying #ROK believes #DPRK "ready to launch missile" moved to east sea. #Korea

i was sitting here. really high. wondering how cool it would not be if china was secretly using north korea as a puppet to instigate war with the us. stupid nervous scared americans buy shiat. also it would pull us further into debt. after n.korea instigates war wit hthe south and we step in china doesnt have to fake pretense anymore and they can actually DEFEND north korea who they were already using as OFFENSE and then go on the offense themselves and take out whoever they want. maybe japan.

The only problem with that theory (from China's point of view anyway), is all our debt we sold to China would be null and void if we went to war together.

It might be the reason why we haven't given them food to shut them up yet. Going to war with China benefits America: no debt, manufacturing returns to the US/Mexico (a current trend), Obama gets warhawks on his side to push his agenda.


Damn, the derp in this thread is DEEP. China doesn't hold most of our debt. WE do (or our institutions and rich people do). China holds about a trillion dollars of our $18 trillion debt. So does Japan. This teabagger notion that we're debt slaves to China is just stupid; they actually hold less in U.S. bonds now than a couple years ago.
 
2013-04-09 12:36:25 PM

mbillips: Damn, the derp in this thread is DEEP. China doesn't hold most of our debt. WE do (or our institutions and rich people do). China holds about a trillion dollars of our $18 trillion debt. So does Japan. This teabagger notion that we're debt slaves to China is just stupid; they actually hold less in U.S. bonds now than a couple years ago.


THANK YOU
 
2013-04-09 12:44:22 PM

Mojongo: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: "We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things."-Chesty Puller

"Retreat Hell! We're just attacking in another direction." (Attributed to Major General Oliver P. Smith, USMC, Korea, December 1950.)


My dad met Maj. General Oliver Smith. General Smith pinned a medal on my father during the Korean War. My father is the one who advised me that it is not wise to sing "The Marine Corps Hymn" to the tune of "My Darlin' Clementine".

/RIP Raymond G. Carter, GySgt Ret.
 
2013-04-09 01:05:42 PM
Can't we just flip a coin with China to see who has to go in and clean house?
 
2013-04-09 01:15:30 PM

dittybopper: BorgiaGinz: dittybopper: Lehk: You undereestimate the artillery north korea has deployed.

The first shot would BE "the single most devastating mass ordinance barrage the world has ever seen or ever will see again"

And it would be directed at a civilian population.

Actually, I've taken a look at their artillery.   Most of it doesn't have the range to hit the large population centers like Seoul, though some of the more northerly cities are in range.

WHAT "more northerly cities"? Seoul is less than an hour's drive to the DMZ. Are you referring to the northern suburbs of Seoul, like Chonnyangni or Uijongbu? Both of them have US military bases attached, and attacking them would be instant war and the destruction of Best Korea. Or are you referring to out of the way towns in Kangwon-do, like Sokcho, but that's way to the east and really not an important target. There's an Army base in Munsan, northwest of Seoul, close to the Best Korean border, but again the Norks would be insane to hit it.

I'm talking about the northern suburbs.

Drive time isn't a good indicator of artillery range.

The outskirts of Seoul proper are about 19 miles from the closest part of North Korea.  That puts most of Seoul out of range of almost all of the KPA artillery.   In fact, for the overwhelming majority of KPA artillery that has the range to hit Seoul, it has to be stationed in the area directly south of Kaesong, a very circumscribed area that will be subject to intense counter-battery fire and strikes by precision munitions if things ever come to blows.

There is artillery that can hit it from longer ranges, but the DPRK doesn't have all that much of it, and it's mostly either rockets, or big tubes, and both have slow set-up and reload times, so it's not going to be like a constant rain of shells and rockets.

No, the KPA isn't going to target civilian areas, they are going to try to hit military bases first and foremost.  To do otherwise would be stupid and basically suicidal:  You don't ignore the forces you are going to be fighting.  There are civilian areas near those bases, and they'll get hit, but that's an example of collateral damage.

I'll start getting worried when I hear of troop movements within Best Korea.  Until that time, it's all bluster to show that Un is in charge.

It's Jung Un, not Un. Korean first names are, with a very few exceptions, two syllables, like Mi-Hye, Seung Ho, Hee Bin, Ji Won, and so on.

I'm aware of that.  My son is half Korean.  I was dissing him by using just the last syllable of his name, which in English has a negative connotation (Un-cola=not cola, unattractive = not attractive, etc.).


You saw a Korean weiner? Was it tiny?
 
2013-04-09 01:22:23 PM

The Irresponsible Captain: marius2: [img541.imageshack.us image 533x640]


It's "warMONGER"



/know the difference.


that's GRINMAN
 
2013-04-09 01:29:00 PM

The Bestest: mbillips: Damn, the derp in this thread is DEEP. China doesn't hold most of our debt. WE do (or our institutions and rich people do). China holds about a trillion dollars of our $18 trillion debt. So does Japan. This teabagger notion that we're debt slaves to China is just stupid; they actually hold less in U.S. bonds now than a couple years ago.

THANK YOU


WRONG, CHINKS ARE LITERALLY KNOCKING ON MY FRONT DOOR ASKING FOR MY DEBIT CARD PIN AT THIS MOMENT
 
2013-04-09 01:42:22 PM
This business will get out of control. It will get out of cont...oh fark it. I've long ago ceased giving any farks about fat boy and his saber rattling. I don't want another war, and I definitely don't want nukes involved, but seriously he needs to shiat or get off the pot.
 
2013-04-09 01:43:18 PM

Satanic_Hamster: That, and you have to figure a lot of those troops have never fired that artillery piece in their life, a lot of the pieces haven't been fired ever or in decades...


Meh.

Most artillery is pretty damned simple.  It's not like they have a whole lot of fiddly bits that need constant maintenance and adjustment.

Well, maybe some US artillery is like that, but the (for the most part) simple Soviet-era tube artillery and derivatives thereof that the KPA has, if you keep them oiled and do some PMCS on them once in a while, they should stay in perfectly serviceable condition for, what, 50 to 100 years?
 
2013-04-09 02:00:59 PM

HallsOfMandos: Ringshadow: [m1ek.dahmus.org image 625x265]

Put up or shut up, NorK. You're the fat kid in gym class threatening to beat everyone up with their kung-fu.

Or with their country lobster

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x384]

/marginally obscure



that lobster is no match for hot air!
 
2013-04-09 02:12:51 PM
NK: We are going to drop a Nuke on Guam, we are going to Nuke Hawaii, and we are going to Nuke the US major cities. You will all die in waves of nuclear fire!

Nk: BTW can we PLEASE please have a bunch of food and money?

US: What? fark no! fark you! I hope your people decapitate and eat you. farker.
 
2013-04-09 02:27:21 PM

Professor Farksworth: This business will get out of control. It will get out of cont...oh fark it. I've long ago ceased giving any farks about fat boy and his saber rattling. I don't want another war, and I definitely don't want nukes involved, but seriously he needs to shiat or get off the pot.


Actually he needs to get ON THE POT (CANNABIS) h0h0h0 j00 4¦23 ¦\¦00¦
 
2013-04-09 02:32:40 PM
HAPPY PREMISE NUMBER ONE: THERE ARE NO ALIENS
 
2013-04-09 03:25:10 PM

mbillips: shortymac: universebetween: ontariolightning: @W7VOA: Yonhap quotes "multiple gov't sources" saying #ROK believes #DPRK "ready to launch missile" moved to east sea. #Korea

i was sitting here. really high. wondering how cool it would not be if china was secretly using north korea as a puppet to instigate war with the us. stupid nervous scared americans buy shiat. also it would pull us further into debt. after n.korea instigates war wit hthe south and we step in china doesnt have to fake pretense anymore and they can actually DEFEND north korea who they were already using as OFFENSE and then go on the offense themselves and take out whoever they want. maybe japan.

The only problem with that theory (from China's point of view anyway), is all our debt we sold to China would be null and void if we went to war together.

It might be the reason why we haven't given them food to shut them up yet. Going to war with China benefits America: no debt, manufacturing returns to the US/Mexico (a current trend), Obama gets warhawks on his side to push his agenda.

Damn, the derp in this thread is DEEP. China doesn't hold most of our debt. WE do (or our institutions and rich people do). China holds about a trillion dollars of our $18 trillion debt. So does Japan. This teabagger notion that we're debt slaves to China is just stupid; they actually hold less in U.S. bonds now than a couple years ago.


I should note that it's a crackpot conspiracy theory in response to a crackpot conspiracy theory, not what i actually believe.

/I love conspiracy theories
//Don't believe them however
 
2013-04-09 03:36:08 PM

Dog Welder: NobleHam: War's never ideal, but this time it's preferable to the alternative of letting North Korea stick around. And building North Korea won't be our expense to pay. What isn't covered by private investment (see German re-unification) will be covered by Seoul.

Can you honestly sit there and type that?  That if we go in and bomb the shiat out of North Korea that we WOULDN'T be paying for it?  That is delusional.

We'll be paying out money to Halliburton to go in and do a huge chunk of the work because that's what we do.  It will cost us TRILLIONS, even if South Korea, Japan and China pick up a chunk of the tab.  Not to mention the cost of human lives that will get tossed aside and destroyed.

If you're advocating war, sorry, you've lost the debate (and I fully believe North Korea deserves whatever they have coming to them).  You can saying this "isn't Iraq," but the lessons of Iraq should be obvious.  Fighting a preemptive war is wrong and destructive to our own position in the world.

Again, if North Korea tries something stupid, I'm all for retaliation.  But not until then.  (And if it happens retaliation will start about 5 minutes after the North makes a move.)


If you think Iraq taught us not to fight pre-emptive wars, you got the wrong lesson out of Iraq. Iraq taught us not to get involved in centuries old ethnic conflicts next to Iran. We won't be paying Halliburton shiat more than we pay them already to staff bases in South Korea (which as far as I know is nada) and the war would not be expensive. The expenses are in rebuilding and garrisoning troops long term. We wouldn't need to garrison any more troops than we already do so that cost is irrelevant, and rebuilding would not be on us. It's not delusional, it's logical.
 
2013-04-09 04:16:23 PM

NobleHam: war would not be expensive


I generally agree with most everything you said except this part.

Unlike Iraq, we would be expending vast amounts of precision munitions and employing significant numbers of costly platforms at a high tempo.  We'd lose a few to operational causes if nothing else.

It would be expensive.  Maybe not 10 year occupation expensive, but still very expensive.
 
2013-04-09 05:24:22 PM

Dog Welder: NobleHam: That quote is the kind of reactionary bullshiat from the Iraq War I was talking about. North Korea is as much like Iraq as it is like the United States: not at all. If North Korea starts the war, it's going to be a lot more expensive and a lot more bloody because even if their proven WMDs aren't functional, they will shell Seoul. If we start it, it WILL be quick and cheap. The rebuilding will not be cheap, but it won't be solely on us, it will pay dividends, and there will be ample willing investors. China, South Korea and Japan will all want a piece of that untapped market.

Yeah, how'd that "Iraq war will pay for itself" bullshiat work out for us?  It turns out we just couldn't take their oil and the American tax payer got stuck with the tab AND high gas prices.

If people want to just go in and start a war for mineral rights, let China do it.

And you seriously don't think if we started bombing North Korea that they wouldn't start shooting everything they have at Seoul, do you?  That's delusional.  Or worse...hitting Tokyo with one of their nukes just because they can.

A war with North Korea, regardless of who starts it, will be bad news for everybody involved.  And rebuilding North Korea (i.e. building North Korea) is going to be expensive.  We don't have any money, last I checked.

Chances are this is all just bluster, like it has been for the past 30 years.  If it's not, we definitely need to be ready.


one thing is for sure; the element of surprise is advantageous.   If we are going to go to war with them, if it is truly inevitable, then we should start it and make damn sure it is a surprise, because the alternative will surely cost more.

This is not Iraq.  We don't need 6 months to build up our forces, we don't need the world to approve, and we don't need a coalition of the willing.  The only thing that matters is what the US and South Koreans think, and to a much lesser extent, China.    Most of what we will need is already sitting in South Korea or nearby.  We are already at war.  If the worst thing we can be accused of is breaking a cease fire, then let whoooopdy-farking-doo...
 
2013-04-09 06:58:42 PM

Tenatra: neongoats: I wish I knew how to mock this properly. How do you make fun of a retard or a midget without sounding mean? Granted, comparing fatty kim to retards and midgets is an insult to midgets and retards everywhere.

[sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net image 850x274]


Got a serious ROR out of me.
 
2013-04-09 11:10:18 PM

Cagey B: NobleHam: We ought to give them war whether they want it or not.

You're right. Initiating a massively destabilizing armed conflict in response to transparent dick-waving is the prudent call here. I'm glad the 403rd Keyboard Brigade is on the scene now.


CHAIRrrrrrrrrrrrrrBORN!
 
2013-04-10 12:03:50 AM

dukeblue219: Abacus9: As far as 25 million devotees, I'm sure that's what they want us to think. Drop 'em some food

I've seen a lot of folks suggesting this in other threads ("Let's just airdrop food for everyone"). This isn't Somalia, you know. They have elaborate air defense networks and hundreds of fighter jets. They don't have much fuel and probably not a ton of ammunition for those guns, but what are we supposed to do, just fly a hundred C-17's over Pyongyang in the middle of the night? There's no way that will cause trouble......


Fine then, do it remotely. Nuke 'em some food (not with an actual nuke). ABM with food package parachutes, something like that.
 
2013-04-10 12:07:13 AM

Even With A Chainsaw: Abacus9: miss diminutive: NobleHam: limited military action

I think the issue is that many "limited military actions" can easily become "costly and bloody clusterfarks" if things don't go as planned. And we're talking war here, when do things ever go according to plan?

I don't get why we can't just do what we did with Bin Laden. Problem solved.

So we should spend 10 years attacking, say, Mongolia, and then eventually get around to killing him?


Hmmm, not exactly the point I was trying to make...
 
2013-04-10 12:13:22 AM

indarwinsshadow: I was thinking yesterday, you know. I really couldn't give a flying crap if North Korea annihilated South Korea. I really don't care. Do you? I'm not saying this as a troll but would you really give up your life for a bunch of ungrateful Koreans? From what I've read they seem like a bunch of lazy over priviliged assholes who want everyone (see white people) to give up their lives to keep their asses (money, wealth) safe. F*ck 'em. It's time North Americans starting looking after our own countries. We get dragged into these wars for a bunch of people who would prefer us as chatel slaves, we get killed, they get rich. Forget it. I wouldn't go to war to save South Korea. Let North Korea have it. This isn't 1950 and the world has changed since the bad of days of spreading communisim.


So... Fark 'em Gangnam style?
Seriously though, if North Korea wipes out South Korea, we would probably be next on the list. That's a good enough reason to not let it happen.
 
2013-04-10 01:05:38 AM
For all you international political experts...technically the Korean War never ended does that mean that UN resolution 82/83 are still 'in play'? Could South Korea, Japan or the US use them as justification to respond to the North's actions and say they are allowable under some 60 year old UN resolution?
 
2013-04-10 10:28:44 AM

Abacus9: indarwinsshadow: I was thinking yesterday, you know. I really couldn't give a flying crap if North Korea annihilated South Korea. I really don't care. Do you? I'm not saying this as a troll but would you really give up your life for a bunch of ungrateful Koreans? From what I've read they seem like a bunch of lazy over priviliged assholes who want everyone (see white people) to give up their lives to keep their asses (money, wealth) safe. F*ck 'em. It's time North Americans starting looking after our own countries. We get dragged into these wars for a bunch of people who would prefer us as chatel slaves, we get killed, they get rich. Forget it. I wouldn't go to war to save South Korea. Let North Korea have it. This isn't 1950 and the world has changed since the bad of days of spreading communisim.

So... Fark 'em Gangnam style?
Seriously though, if North Korea wipes out South Korea, we would probably be next on the list. That's a good enough reason to not let it happen.


Why? What would be the purpose? I can see how punk ass Kim Jong-Un would have a hardon to attack and put Korea back together, where his daddy and grandpa failed, but why attack the United States if they don't intervene?

Keep asking myself what Karl Marx said in Das Kapital - Who does it benefit?
 
2013-04-11 12:05:45 AM

indarwinsshadow: Abacus9: indarwinsshadow: I was thinking yesterday, you know. I really couldn't give a flying crap if North Korea annihilated South Korea. I really don't care. Do you? I'm not saying this as a troll but would you really give up your life for a bunch of ungrateful Koreans? From what I've read they seem like a bunch of lazy over priviliged assholes who want everyone (see white people) to give up their lives to keep their asses (money, wealth) safe. F*ck 'em. It's time North Americans starting looking after our own countries. We get dragged into these wars for a bunch of people who would prefer us as chatel slaves, we get killed, they get rich. Forget it. I wouldn't go to war to save South Korea. Let North Korea have it. This isn't 1950 and the world has changed since the bad of days of spreading communisim.

So... Fark 'em Gangnam style?
Seriously though, if North Korea wipes out South Korea, we would probably be next on the list. That's a good enough reason to not let it happen.

Why? What would be the purpose? I can see how punk ass Kim Jong-Un would have a hardon to attack and put Korea back together, where his daddy and grandpa failed, but why attack the United States if they don't intervene?

Keep asking myself what Karl Marx said in Das Kapital - Who does it benefit?


I agree with you completely, but keep in mind we're probably not dealing with a sane and rational guy. He's been threatening to nuke us for awhile now, for whatever reason. He may be crazy enough to try it. I'm not worried, I don't think he will, I think he's just big-stuffin' it to impress his people. But you never know.
 
2013-04-11 01:40:44 AM

Abacus9: Keep asking myself what Karl Marx said in Das Kapital - Who does it benefit?


"Wem"

FTFY
 
Displayed 30 of 280 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report