severna koreja spet grozi
- Ustvarjalec teme WeWatchingYou
- Začetni datum
Seveda so kitajski mediji najverodostojnejši kar se Tibeta tiče
In zaradi nekaj vohunov so okupirali celo državo, pobili desttisočE, zrušili na tisoče samostanov.... Ta zgodba o angleških vohunih je verodostojna ravno toliko kot tista o WMD v Iraku.
Kaj so potem Kitajci delali na Korejskem polotoku leta 1953?
Citat:
Uporabnik Abraham pravi:
...
Na radiu predvajajo nek govor v korejščini, zraven je prevod v angleščini. Noben pol kurca ne razume korejsko in lahko, da napovedovalec govori o vremenu ali pa pripoveduje vice, podnapisi ali "simultani prevod" pa govori o napadu na amerikance z atomsko bombo.
...
Če ti (in jaz in večina na tem forumu) "pol kurca" ne razume korejsko, to še ne pomeni, da se lahko nateguje z napačnim prevodom, Na svetu je precej ljudi, ki znajo korejsko in jim ZDA niso ravno pri srcu - in če bi šlo pri prevodu za zavajanje, bi se zagotovo oglasili.
ksz..
http://rt.com/news/pyongyang-trolling-seoul-provocations-321/
Pyongyang has expressed a desire to “start communication” with Washington, Joseph Kim told RT, but
“Washington’s presence in South Korea is growing larger.” Anti-war activist Eugene Puryear from the ANSWER coalition believes that a peaceful solution to the crisis is possible but blames the United States for hampering it.
“What people need to understand is that the North Korean government - the DPRK - has consistently put forward four basic principles to the United States in negotiations. One is to sign a peace treaty to end the Korean War - most people don’t realize this, at least in the United States, after the war ended in 1953 the United States has refused to sign any sort of peace treaty, they’ve only signed an armistice,” he explained to RT.
“North Korea has consistently asked for a peace treaty, with the de-militarization of the peninsula, and bilateral talks with the United States to reduce tensions. So I think if the United States would put down their weapons, sign a peace treaty, and let North Korea know that they were not aiming to overthrow their regime, as they have consistently hinted towards, then they would be able to back out of this crisis in a very peaceful way.”
As for the means the US chooses to achieve its ends, there are questions remaining as to the efficacy.
Gregory Elich, a member of think tank for the advisory board at the Korea Policy Institute, told RT the United States is interested in the collapse of the North, as the US “can establish their military bases right on the border with China, meaning an encirclement of that nation.” He added that America never “never tolerated a country that won’t put its economy at the service of foreign corporations.”
http://rt.com/news/pyongyang-trolling-seoul-provocations-321/
Pyongyang has expressed a desire to “start communication” with Washington, Joseph Kim told RT, but
“Washington’s presence in South Korea is growing larger.” Anti-war activist Eugene Puryear from the ANSWER coalition believes that a peaceful solution to the crisis is possible but blames the United States for hampering it.
“What people need to understand is that the North Korean government - the DPRK - has consistently put forward four basic principles to the United States in negotiations. One is to sign a peace treaty to end the Korean War - most people don’t realize this, at least in the United States, after the war ended in 1953 the United States has refused to sign any sort of peace treaty, they’ve only signed an armistice,” he explained to RT.
“North Korea has consistently asked for a peace treaty, with the de-militarization of the peninsula, and bilateral talks with the United States to reduce tensions. So I think if the United States would put down their weapons, sign a peace treaty, and let North Korea know that they were not aiming to overthrow their regime, as they have consistently hinted towards, then they would be able to back out of this crisis in a very peaceful way.”
As for the means the US chooses to achieve its ends, there are questions remaining as to the efficacy.
Gregory Elich, a member of think tank for the advisory board at the Korea Policy Institute, told RT the United States is interested in the collapse of the North, as the US “can establish their military bases right on the border with China, meaning an encirclement of that nation.” He added that America never “never tolerated a country that won’t put its economy at the service of foreign corporations.”
Citat:
Uporabnik Abraham pravi:
Noben pol kurca ne razume korejsko in lahko, da napovedovalec govori o vremenu ali pa pripoveduje vice, podnapisi ali "simultani prevod" pa govori o napadu na amerikance z atomsko bombo.
Joj! Kakšne blesarije pa ti trosiš
... ker si zadnji
CVN-74 je na poti iz Singapurja domov, CVN-86 in CVN-70 sta pripravljeni na izplutje, CVN-76 je ravno z enoletnega bivakiranja v suhem doku v ožini Puget in tudi pripravljena, posledica pa je ena lepa slikca iz San Diega.
Po vrsti Nimitz, Reagan, Vinson.
CVN-74 je na poti iz Singapurja domov, CVN-86 in CVN-70 sta pripravljeni na izplutje, CVN-76 je ravno z enoletnega bivakiranja v suhem doku v ožini Puget in tudi pripravljena, posledica pa je ena lepa slikca iz San Diega.
Po vrsti Nimitz, Reagan, Vinson.
Kaj ti to pomaga? Vojne se ne odločajo več s pehoto. Mene je strah, da glede na spodnji video, da SK vojaki, sploh nimajo pojma, kaj jih bo pričakalo na drugi strani. Če pa pride do vojne, dvomim, da bo sploh potrebna intervencija USA, jih JK kar sama zradirala. Ne pozabiti, tudi v JK je obvezen vojaški rok - 2 leti.
Nazadnje urejeno:
Vietnam je bil več kot 30 let nazaj, vojskovanje se je ohoho spremenilo od takrat, če že samo tehnologijo pogledaš. Hočem povedati, da ti velika pehota ne pomaga veliko, če ti na drugi strani stoji bistveno bolje tehnično razviti nasprotnik. Primer: Naci Nemčija napade Polsjko leta 39'. Poljaki so takrat imeli najštevilčnejšo vosjko v Evropi - 1 miljion ljudi, razdeljen, kot pehota in konjenica. Proti Blizkriegu so zdražali, koliko? 1 mesec, če se pravilno spomnim
Švaba powah! Ja...res je ja.
Bomo videli, poglejte tole analizo:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/?...north-korea.cnn
Wow...kakšna grafika, in prikaz zadev, mater smo mi tehnično zaostali....
Bomo videli, poglejte tole analizo:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/?...north-korea.cnn
Wow...kakšna grafika, in prikaz zadev, mater smo mi tehnično zaostali....
Vprašanj je, kako definiraš zmago: v Iraku in Afganistanu je bilo 'vojne' konec v nekaj tednov, samo da v bistvu traja še danes. Če je tvoj namen zravnati državi z zemljo, potem to lahko storiš v nekaj minutah. Če želiš vreči režim in postaviti novo državo, ki bo ta režim spoštovala, pa ti nobena tehnologija ne bo pomagala.Citat:
Uporabnik ne6c pravi:
Vietnam je bil več kot 30 let nazaj, vojskovanje se je ohoho spremenilo od takrat, če že samo tehnologijo pogledaš. Hočem povedati, da ti velika pehota ne pomaga veliko, če ti na drugi strani stoji bistveno bolje tehnično razviti nasprotnik. Primer: Naci Nemčija napade Polsjko leta 39'. Poljaki so takrat imeli najštevilčnejšo vosjko v Evropi - 1 miljion ljudi, razdeljen, kot pehota in konjenica. Proti Blizkriegu so zdražali, koliko? 1 mesec, če se pravilno spomnim
