 ouyangwulong says: Wait a minute, did they just seriously say that? Follow the KOREAN model? That's a great idea! I mean, after the Korean War we created two stable and successful countries, and there were never any military problems or crises there ever again, right? I'm sorry but WHAT THE F*** IS THIS? Is their memory really that short? Its like they've got Korsakoff's Syndrome. These are the same people who were desperately trying to negotiate a nuclear crIsis on the Korean peninsula like three or four months ago? Did they forget they didn't solve that crisis yet? Is it because North Korea is No. 3 on the Axis of Evil list while Iraq was No. 1 that this may be seen as progress? Are we learning from past mistakes so that we can go and intentionally make them again?!?!?! THIS IS F'ING CRAZY! Sorry for that outburst, its just that I live within the nuclear fallout zone for any conflict on the Korean Peninsula. And sometimes some things are just so stupid they get my dander up! You know, next they'll be talking about following the "Vietnamese Model." Quick! Everyone! To the roof of the Embassy! And sometimes some things are just so stupid they get my dander up!Pop for that remark. At last the big bad wolf is showing its tail! What is the next big lie the big bad wolf going to tell the world? No, what they did is prevent MacArthur for starting WW3. And this whole war has followed the Vietnam model. I also hope for the sake of Iraqi lives we do end by shipping as many of them out as we can so they don't get massacred. Heitz669... A good point, the Korean War could have ended in total global annihilation in 1953 instead of 2010, but once again, isn't WWIII kind of an absolute worst-case scenario? I mean, if we say "Oh, well at least we didn't start WWIII..." isn't that lowering the bar a little bit for what a good occupational model should be? I'm a little calmer now, so I'll rephrase all my points with my usual coherence and grace. (?)  The outcome in Korea wasn't the worst case scenario, but it was not a very good one. It created a bunch of serious problems that we are still dealing with today. Why anyone would want to copy that model is beyond me. Does Bush think he can only draw his strategies fro... Oh, and by the way Clip-dudes... If the Betty Crocker people get in a snit over my use of their trademarked brand name in that last comment, you guys can go ahead and delete it... Comparing the current conflict in Iraq to the conflict in Korea at the start of the Cold War is erroneous. So is basing the partitioning of one upon other as a solution. While the Korean War began as a local conflict, it was essentially an American-Soviet-Chinese conflict at the time of the Armistice. The only reason the American public was willing to go along with such a long term commitment was to avoid a full-scale war between the powers. In Iraq, there is not enemy in the Soviet-Chinese role. A Korean solution would not be politically viable here at home even if it were partitioning were realistic in Iraq. To be honest, I saw "Korean model" and I was hoping for a girl pic... LOL Cniq-Cniq raises a valuable point. There is no one to restrain the opposition, only us to restrain our allies. Perhaps a better example of partition to consider would be much closer to Iraq: the UN partition of Israel and Palestine. The result was not a lasting peace, but immediate war, and it ended with the partitioned areas being re-unified by the strongest military power. If Iraq ever is partitioned, it must be the choice of the Iraqis, not us. We cannot control the civil war now, what makes us think we could control it after partition? What frustrates me the most is that the Bush administration continues to demonstrate an understanding of history that would be considered sub-par in mos... |
View the Top Clips from June 3, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
