That's for sure, They can only hope to end the war in a couple months. Any longer, their military expense itself will drag the country into economic crisis

They cannot hold, exactly, N. Korea is not strong enough, yet

What korea? South korea can hold a fight for awhile. North korea would collapse soon. But I like that site of yours. I will have to look at it more to see how relyable it is. But atleast everything was up to date.

North Korea is not strong enough, however , it's strong enough to make both Koreas suffer great losses

we meant N. Korea.
Anyways, korea wont start anything soon, so no worries

It is that thinking that will lead asia into a sea of flames.

huh? dont undertsand you, what is the sea of flames?
Anyways, N. Korea will get back up by china, i believed

I think "sea of flames" he meant potential threats

oicic
Anyways, even so, N. Korea aint going to be the one

You think China would support North Korea?
well, the reason why I think it might : China doesn't want to fight in its own territory, it'll prefer to fight at other people's land. North Korea will be a shield of China, any attack will first make damage on N.K.
the reason why I don't think : recently N.K. has shown disobediency to China, it's building up nuclear weapons, and sometimes it goes against China's will. It's possible that China wants to shake N.K. off in order to improve the relationship with other countries.

haha, if you can guess it, you wouldnt be here, right?
You never know.
Yet i think china wont, yet, for some reasons

I heard something I am not sure if it is true or not. But I understand the peoples army recently put several thousand men on the boarder of north korea. Is this correct?

they are, let me check.
Anyways, you think N. korea will dare to do anything???

I haven't checked news lately, it might be true. China wants an ally, but definately not one armed with nuclear weapons right next door

china got more friends(nations) they do not need N. Korea

An ally with nukes would be a very strong deterant. But then this is north korea we speak of so I can understand why. But perhaps putting men on the boarder is a threat to both america AND north korea?

yes It can be interpreted by both ways. But it's most likely directed to N. Korea, because China is also sideing with US and negotiating with N.korea to disarm its nukes. Therefore there's no current need to threaten USA. But I can't be sure

I hope someone assasinate Mr. f@g kim

What do other people think? What country will support n.korea?

The only reason why China is siding with the U.S. right now is probably because U.S. is their biggest consumer. When it really comes down to deciding which side China will be on, China has a good chance of staying loyal to N.K. because during the Korean War N.K. had very close ties to China, and I think if ur not careful China still might side with N.K. Who u talkin about?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, then don't ask.

Kim Jong Il.




No.


Edit: Going back to topic there is a recent article about the controversy of Koguryo. The minister wants to leave it up to the people to decide.

http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/nation/200...21424511980.htm

In the real world, there are no emotional ties between nations, only strategic. This means that just because two countries are allies today, it doesn't mean they won't become enemies tomorrow and vice versa. Before 1911, China and U.S. were enemies. U.S., and seven other European countries and Japan, invaded China. But from 1911 - 1970's, China and U.S. were allies, especially during World War II. But after the 1970's, U.S. turned its back on Republic of China (Taiwan) simply because People's Republic of China (mainland China) became strong and would benefit U.S. more than Taiwan would.

During the Korean War, China only joined North Korea after U.S. and South Korean forces pushed North Korean forces near the Chinese border. China didn't want the war to spill into its own land so she sent forces to fight U.S. and South Korea. This was during the Mao Zedong era. Three "generations" have passed in China since then, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, and now Hu Jintao. Each of these generations are quite different from another. I seriously doubt that there are still, if ever, any emotional ties between China and North Korea.

U.S. is the same way. When U.S. was afraid of Iran, U.S. government assisted Saddam Hussein to become the leader or Iran's neighbor, Iraq, trained his Republican Guards, gave Saddam chemical and biological weapons. Eventually, Saddam became more a "problem" to the U.S. because he no longer obey the U.S. government, and now his country lies in ruins and he might face death penalty.

i am sorry ogumo, just read too much trash lately

I am a he. Ultra nationalistic? Incorret. I have also never participated in any korean forum. That is not my thing. Racist? Was it not I that mentioned to the other japanese that insulting the koreans was not right? I also believe that it is korea and china that do not want to see japan with power. This is why I said they will stand in our way to do anything. "j@p slapped"? and I am the racist? You are a joke. Get your facts straight before you try to "expose" me like you have done because now you have made yourself look foolish. Oh and about me refering to japanese as my "Race". I had already previously mentioned that it was a error.
Also my racial "brother" I have a problem with this.

"The korean forums are clean compared to the japanese ones". Prove it. Prove me wrong where that other korean could not.

japan from what i can see seems to have no real loyalty to 'asia'. it only cares about its own power without even thinking of the consequences of what that means. it will even attack the mainland to get it meaning our own people(asians). Because of this a third party(west) moved in and is running the show and defining us instead of us defining ourselves. Yes, this is in the past but very recently. Koreans are very patriotic and i think have asia's best interests at heart. I'm not so sure about japan. Bottomline all these divisions weaken asia and make it exploitable. When one is exploited, the others scatter. Pretty soon you will start to see a mutation of sorts of what you would call sellouts. If this isn't reversed there will cease to be an asia and another would have completely conquered us without even trying.

toonluv please refrain from attacking other members

Yeh...although I am Korean, I agree he shouldn't do that...

And about those statistics from below...the armored personal thing...
Right now, quantity ain't important that much. If we compare things only with number, North Korea's Navy power would easily outmatch Japanese's one

What really matters is military expenditure, which means quality. For example, think about Desert Storm and Shock and Awe.

You are right it is not just numbers. I was in the military and I have some friends who were at the DMZ in korea and desert storm. America is the greatest military in the world. It is and it isn't. Its how you define it. It is because of the greater resources and money not on the individual quality of the soldier. If you were to pit an american soldier with a north korean or even a south korean soldier there would be no contest. The korean soldier bottomline is more serious and better trained. So again statistics can be misleading. If it takes 10 of you to defeat 1 of me and you win, Does that make you better and stronger? Of course not. Bottomline its just about a win or lose game.

You still haven't proven your case. I have not forgotten. If you cannot you atleast owe me a appology since you joined this forum and began making false accusing statements against me.

Ok..toonluv..I see your point..

However, a war is not a matter of one man versus 10 men. It is a matter between "countries". You are missing that point. For example, in WW2, it was obvious that German soldiers were far more superiorly trained than russian soldiers. But it turns out to be this way. Russia was the most important country to the allied victory. It was not the matter was how well the soldiers were trained or serious. In the end, although russia's casualties were much more serius, a country with much more potential, natural resource, and man power, altogether the power of country, decides who wins.

About seriousness...In WW2, no other soldiers were serius than japanese soldiers
But US was able to pour almost 5~6 carriers in a year at that time while Japan could not even replenish the lost carrier numbers. One by one, Japanese carriers sunk in Midway, Coral sea, and in Philippine. America was also having constant damage, however, they had strength to replenish also constantly.

Bottomline matters, but not as much as the country's power.

yes, you were just repeating my point. When I stated 'serious' i was indicating an aspect of personal ability or attitude among many others. That of course many things factor in. But if we're talking about personal ability I don't think a japanese is necessarily better than a korean, I don't buy it at all. You could paint that same scenario in essence between korea and japan as you did with japan and the U.S. I AGREE with you there are a lot of factors that determine the eventual outcome where the 'winner' gets all the accolades, thats the way it is.

So...are we agreed than?
btw..you shouldn't have sworn to Ogumo although his opinion may have been disgreeable to you..

The fact is, South Korea is still welcoming the US troops to station in the country.

i thought they were trying to kick them out...

after that tragic korea incident...

heck why would they welcom the Americans back into their country...

I would say China will support N Korea in case of war.

i am not 100% sure if china will supposrt N. Korea

It depends on war against whom.

During the Korean War in the 50's, China supported North Korea for one main reason and one minor reason.

Main reason: China doesn't want U.S. forces right outside it's front porch. China'd rather fight on foreign territory than its own. Fighting a war on your own land can cause greater damages than just physical. Look at China, after over 200 years of wars and conflicts, both external and internal, it took a while to rebuild the country. It took a while to rebuild Korea after the Korean War, same with Vietnam and everywhere else.

Minor reason: North Korea claimed itself to be a "communist" nation, just like China, therefore China felt obligated to assist.

Yes, Yes. The north/south korean soldiers have superior training compared to the u.s. soldiers but so are the australian, british, and israeli soldiers.

Like karl kani said mobilization is a little more important to a lot more important depending on what country it is.



The one thing I have to disagree with him on is the german troops.

The german troops could have defeated the russian army if they were as well-trained as us. The biggest thing that killed them was the siberian winter, the korean troops aren't as much affected by weather compared to western armies, the german advisors said "If we had troops like the south korean army we could have conquered the world" and they would have had a much more impressive kill ratio. Don't get me wrong mobilization is still important but sometimes superior training can beat mobilization actually I explained this in another thread.

The German Army was THE most advanced and well trained army during the course of WW2 (Waffen SS). Germany's initial success in defeating Poland and France within weeks has never been accomplished by any other country. The kill ratio in the USSR for the Germans was much higher than the Russians. As you said it was the Siberian winter that killed most of the Germans and this was caused by the lack of supplies and not training. As the German army advanced much too far into the USSR, their supply lines grew much longer. They couldn't even reach thier supplies when they got stuck in Stalingrad as millions of Red Army soldiers poured into the city and surrounded them. It was also the stubborn will of Hitler that denied numerous requests to withdraw from Stalingrad and Hitler's initial command to split the half to Germany Army to Stalingrad and the other half to take the Caucus oil fields. They tried to use Blitzkreig on a massive piece of land but because it was so large, small pockets of resistance grew behind the front line and attacked the Luftwaffe supply planes.

So I don't think you can compare WW2 Germany to modern day S. Korea's army. Germany was one of the super powers of that time and defeated almos the entire Europe. I'm sure S. Korea wouldn't be able to do that.

But no doubt S. Korea and Isreal have well trained armies but you can't just say "If Germany had the training of South Korea it could have won". It's like saying "If Germany had the population of China it could have won" or "If Germany had the military industry of the USA it could have won". Get what I'm saying?

I didn't say that, the german advisors said it. They are well-trained with weapons but they aren't as well-trained as us, if their training was as tought as ours the siberian winter and lack of supplies wouldn't have effected them as much as it did.





I was comparing the training standards not what korea could or could not do. It was also to disprove the myth that american troops are the best-trained fighting soldiers in the world.



Yeah, I already know the german army was the most advanced army at the time. From the bismark to their king tigers.

and their V-1, V-2 rockets and Panzer VI....

ogumo, i am sorry for my bad language.

I didn't bother going through all of these pages except for the first page, but going back to what one of the posters said in labeling what the guy wrote as typical, "Korean supremist" junk, everything that was posted is dead on accurate.

Korea DID occupy a part of China during the Goguryo dynasty.

Korea DID help the Jomon race(Japanese) become civilized. Before the arrival of Koreans, Japan was an island of aboriginies and tribes people called Jomons.

Korea was just a nation where the three kingdoms were too effing busy fighting amongst themselve.

But I digress.

I'm new here so I don't know much but I'm guessing the dude who started this post talks shlt a lot.


Anyways, I like the Chinese and the Japanese. They're good people.

Chinese are hard, deligent workers and China will become a modernized country very soon and will become a super power.

Japanese are reserved, peaceful(despite their regrettable wartime history), and inventive people that I admire.

"For those of you who think Japan has changed since WWII, I urge you to read this:Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere Rises Again! Nothing has actually changed here in the hearts and minds of your average Japanese person. The vast majority are historically ignorant and those that that do have some idea of their governments actions 70 years ago prefer to pretend that nothing happened. Thus, politicians in Japan have free reign to reinterpret history, demean non-Japanese people, scapegoat foreign residents, and generally do everything possible to make it difficult for foreign professionals and foreign businesses to have any influence or impact on Japan.
The main issue is the uncompromising ethnocentricity in Japan. One of the "novelties" that wore off a long time ago was the ignorant (yet benign) insistence that if something is stolen or if a violent crime occurs in Japan, then an assumption is made that it; "must have been a foreigner". This title of 'foreigner' extends to other Asians, such as Koreans, Chinese and Taiwanese, who are tarred with the same brush as 'whites'. I have met many Koreans in particular who have changed their name to a Japanese moniker so as to avoid this discrimination. Interestingly, the discrimination is often tacit. You won't find many Japanese people comfortable with sharing a negative opinion about you as a foreigner, as ingrained as it may be. The Japanese call this approach "not losing face". I call it passive-aggression."

Koguryo was NOT a korean empire.

Hey, whatever comforts your insecurities, bro.

Oh yes it was.

Koguryo was as much a Korean kingdom as Nanyue was a Vietnamese kingdom...

Koguryo was built based on Chinese colonies established during the late Han dynasty. When the Han dynasty fell, China lost control on the colonies and soon after, the Koguryo kingdom rose, coincidence?

I'm not saying that Koguryo was purely Chinese either. They obviously had been influenced somewhat by the local natives. But to call Koguryo a "pure" Korean kingdom is as laughable as calling it a "pure" Chinese kingdom. I personally would call it a Sino-Korean kingdom just as I would call Nanyue a Sino-Viet kingdom.

This calls for another encore of