Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

The big mistake

April 30, 2013

I am sick and tired of the escalating threats being made by North Korea and now the news media is indicating that this insane North Korea's military has been authorized to attack the U.S....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(34)

cheyenne

Apr-30-13 1:49 AM

Howard, all of the historical sources I have read state that MacArthur and his forces advanced well past the 38th parallel almost to the Manchurian border before Chinese forces entered the conflict and drove them back.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CaymanJim

Apr-30-13 2:21 AM

MacArthur wanted to use the Atomic bomb to stop the Chinese. The man, while a genius in his time during WWll, became a dangerous liability to America in the early days of the cold war. Truman did the right thing by firing him.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Apr-30-13 2:47 AM

MacArthur was insubordinate and acted independently of his CiC. He had become a liability, in that , given his way: that is, crossing the Yalu River into Manchuria and his advocacy of employing nukes, we would have likely been involved in WW3. The stand-off at the Chosin Resevoir and pushing back Allied forces to the 38th parallel ended the "active" fighting with an armistace, recently annuled by North Korea. Meanwhile the "war" continues.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Apr-30-13 2:52 AM

Actually: The "Korean War" was a "police action". Who could have guessed?

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 5:26 AM

"The man, while a genius in his time during WWll, became a dangerous liability to America in the early days of the cold war." - CaymanJim

He was always a military genius, even during the Korean conflict. What he wasn't was a politician.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 5:38 AM

Relax Howard, it's standard North Korea political brinksmanship. This happens nearly every spring but a few factors made the North Koreans put on a bigger show this year.

Joint military exercises in the south, a new, young and untried leader, the great leader Kim Il-sung's birthday on April 15.

While China (North Koreas main economic lifeline)likes the buffer along their border they are no more willing to allow hostilities to break out on the Korean peninsula than we are.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Apr-30-13 6:07 AM

"I can remember when Gen. Douglas McArthur wanted to cross the 38th parallel but stopped and that was a big mistake of the century." - Howard Ebner

*

I can remember when there were (actually) efforts, in-place, to avoid the present-situation...until OUR "nitwit-son" decided he was desperate for SOME kind of notable-legacy!!

*

See:

The US-North Korean Agreed Framework at a Glance - Arms Control

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Apr-30-13 7:11 AM

North Korea hopes to use war rhetoric to extract food and energy aid from the Obama Administration.

Clinton gave in to this tactic during his term.

9 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Apr-30-13 8:11 AM

"North Korea hopes to use war rhetoric to extract food and energy aid from the Obama Administration.

Clinton gave in to this tactic during his term." - eriklatranyi

*

...And, then...Lil' Dumbya thought it would be MUCH-more-amusing rubbing North Korea's "nose" in their hardships (much the way he used to blow-up frogs, with firecrackers), and WITHDREW any aid that would make North Korea think, twice, about resuming their "Nukes 'R Us" sales-and-marketing efforts.

Lil' Dumbya did the same with all the data compiled by Richard Clarke...regarding terrorism & bin Laden...because, after ALL...it was a Clinton-effort.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Apr-30-13 8:23 AM

Surprise I agree with what Gavin posted. MacArhtur while adept on the battle field was a loose cannon in the arena of government.

The new dictator of North Korea is showing he is his father's son. China seems not all that interested in starting a conflict or letting a 'buffer' state start one either. This could be a reaction to the rebuilding of armed forces in the Pacific arena by the US and her allies.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Apr-30-13 10:17 AM

"The new dictator of North Korea is showing he is his father's son. China seems not all that interested in starting a conflict or letting a 'buffer' state start one either. This could be a reaction to the rebuilding of armed forces in the Pacific arena by the US and her allies." - CMReeder

*

...Or, even...China (unlike U.S. "conservatives") having LEARNED the lesson of what can happen, when partnering-up with some idiot-son who feels a "need" to out-shine his Daddy.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

richardson

Apr-30-13 10:41 AM

Reeder, in regard to US buildup in the Pacific Arena. If this were true, which it is not, any buildup should be in response to China's increasing naval presence in the Pacific Rim. My understanding is that the number of ships in our Navy has never been lower.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Apr-30-13 11:49 AM

The US has made agreements with her allies in the Pacific, to strenghten her presence there. China and her allies don't like it and have said so.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 12:28 PM

Who would that be and what agreements?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Apr-30-13 12:44 PM

Gee I guess you forgot about the much ballyhooed trip Obama took to Asia visiting various countries pledging a renewed presence in the Pacific militarily and economically. He(Obama) has pivoted US military attention to this area. China doesn't like it and has been very vocal about it. He has made 'agreements' that have irked China.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Apr-30-13 12:46 PM

Hi Richardson.. I think the claim you made about the number of ships is in accurate. I think that nonsensical claim was first made by mitt during a debate and was subsequently debunked. Gavin, I think it is accurate, as Charles stated, that the US has increased its military presence in the region, to support both Japan and S. Korea in the wake of N. Korean bluster..

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 1:01 PM

A "renewed commitment" is not an agreement, and let's be realistic, the commitment has always been there and is nothing new. The increased presence was a show of force AFTER North Korea started their sabre rattling. There are no plans or agreement in place for an increase in ground or air forces in the area. The only thing we did was increase our naval presence in the short term.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Apr-30-13 1:45 PM

Lol.. semantics, no, Gavin? In addition, an increased naval presence likely means a carrier task force, thereby increasing our air capabilities, including the use of drones..

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 1:50 PM

It wasn't a carrier task force. It was a missle defense group. Defensive, not offensive.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Apr-30-13 2:33 PM

We have 11 carriers, no other nation has more than 1 (Newsweek). I can't swear to it but I'd be willing to wager we have one in the region..

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 3:02 PM

Purely supposition in order to add validity to you and Chuck's argument, eh BuffTrev1?

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 3:21 PM

..and for the record, we only have 10. The USS Enterprise was inactivated last year.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Apr-30-13 3:35 PM

Not at all, Gavin.. I stand by every word, like always. I think it is entirely likely that we've moved additional assets into the region that the general public is completely unawares of. It seems as though you are the one playing games with words, the intent of both Charles and mines postings is quite valid.. imho, of course. BTW, I'd argue that 'argunent' is far too strong a word..

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gavinf56

Apr-30-13 4:12 PM

Yes, debate would have been more appropriate.

Funny thing, we seem to be more worried about North Korea than the South Koreans. Their attitude is " ho hum, here they go again".

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Apr-30-13 4:44 PM

I can't imagine living in Seoul, a scant twenty miles from the DMZ, although I'm sure it's a vibrant city..

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 34 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web