Korean sword-rattling

[Kadagar_AV]

I am with Jolt on this one.

I am sure they have some die-hard communist/nationalists, however, they are still the same gene-stock as anyone else. I am also sure they are not all retarded. Like in all countries, the intellectuals will see through the lies, and will do something about it.

[Centurion1]

I am with Jolt on this one.

I am sure they have some die-hard communist/nationalists, however, they are still the same gene-stock as anyone else. I am also sure they are not all retarded. Like in all countries, the intellectuals will see through the lies, and will do something about it.

The intellectuals.......... why wouldn't the intellectuals be the ones in power. They may not wish to give up said power

[TinCow]

I am amazed that South Korea hasn't already responded with a retaliatory strike? Is anyone else not amazed?

No, I am not amazed. The benefits to South Korea from a war are very minimal (even a successful one) while the costs of such a war in lives and damage will be huge, even if the war is quick. North Korea has nuclear weapons; you don't rush casually into war against a nuclear power.

[Kadagar_AV]

Centurion1, Does it seem to you that the intellectuals are in power?

I am still however flabbergasted that you can dunk, for me, that is very cool. I find it very hard, not impossible, mind you, but hard. To do it on a daily basis... Impressive, to say the least :)

[Centurion1]

Yes I can dunk and have been able to for a long time....... I'm sure plenty of orgahs can

I would say to some extent in a modern society (n. Korea sometimes functions as one) those in charge are almost always intelligent to some point. I would even say at some point Kim jong. Il is an intelligent creature but very very evil and very very sociopathic

[Kadagar_AV]

Intelligent... Intellectual... Same thing, isn't it? I can see how you mix them up, it is quite easy to do for many people.

You might however want to re-read what my initial answer was to.

The question of Kim's intelligence is very unrelated to the internal intellectual uprising in the event of a war.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Intelligent... Intellectual... Same thing, isn't it?


Kim's intelligence is very unrelated to the internal intellectual uprising

Wait..are intelligence and intellectualism the same thing or are they unrelated?

[Kadagar_AV]

That was below you dear Louis.

To answer your question however, as is polite: Do we need two words for the exact same thing? I would assume not.

However, as much as I like etymology, it has very little bearing on my point directed to Centurion1.

[TinCow]

Intelligence and Intellectual are two completely different words with two completely different meanings.

[Kadagar_AV]

With one more infraction for a ban (specially since one of the infractions I have no idea what the mod talked about, and he has not replied in a week), walking the knives edge of sarcasm is sometimes a trickery business.

As a pure theoretical example: having a discussion with someone more proud of physical skills than intellectual (intelligent?) ones - without being overly insulting obviosly is not all that easy.

But yes TinCow, I do very much agree that intellectual and intelligent would not be the same thing. But then, I just work as language teacher at university level, so my understanding is clearly limited.

[al Roumi]

But then, I just work as language teacher at university level, so my understanding is clearly limited.

Well in that case, you'll be perfectly aware of the definitions below:

in·tel·li·gent (n-tl-jnt)
adj.
1. Having intelligence.
2. Having a high degree of intelligence; mentally acute.
3. Showing sound judgment and rationality: an intelligent decision; an intelligent solution to the problem.
4. Appealing to the intellect; intellectual: a film with witty and intelligent dialogue.
5. Computer Science Having certain data storage and processing capabilities: an intelligent terminal; intelligent peripherals.

in·tel·lec·tu·al (ntl-kch-l)
adj.
1.
a. Of or relating to the intellect.
b. Rational rather than emotional.
2. Appealing to or engaging the intellect: an intellectual book; an intellectual problem.
3.
a. Having or showing intellect, especially to a high degree. See Synonyms at intelligent.
b. Given to activities or pursuits that require exercise of the intellect.

n.
An intellectual person.

[Kadagar_AV]

Well in that case, you'll be perfectly aware of the definitions below:

in·tel·li·gent (n-tl-jnt)
adj.
1. Having intelligence.
2. Having a high degree of intelligence; mentally acute.
3. Showing sound judgment and rationality: an intelligent decision; an intelligent solution to the problem.
4. Appealing to the intellect; intellectual: a film with witty and intelligent dialogue.
5. Computer Science Having certain data storage and processing capabilities: an intelligent terminal; intelligent peripherals.

in·tel·lec·tu·al (ntl-kch-l)
adj.
1.
a. Of or relating to the intellect.
b. Rational rather than emotional.
2. Appealing to or engaging the intellect: an intellectual book; an intellectual problem.
3.
a. Having or showing intellect, especially to a high degree. See Synonyms at intelligent.
b. Given to activities or pursuits that require exercise of the intellect.

n.
An intellectual person.


Edit:

Perhaps Intelligentsia (n.) is a closer to intelectual (n.).

I am indeed perfectly aware of it.

sar·casm
Pronunciation: \ˈsär-ˌka-zəm\
Function: noun
Etymology: French or Late Latin; French sarcasme, from Late Latin sarcasmos, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein to tear flesh, bite the lips in rage, sneer, from sark-, sarx flesh; probably akin to Avestan thwarəs- to cut
Date: 1550
1 : a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2 a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b : the use or language of sarcasm



See, I can do science too!

[Louis VI the Fat]

Intelligent... Intellectual... Same thing, isn't it? I can see how you mix them up, it is quite easy to do for many people.

Wait, now I get it. You meant they are not the same thing. For a minute there, I thought you said one thing in one post, and something else in another.

[Kadagar_AV]

Wait, now I get it. You meant they are not the same thing. For a minute there, I thought you said one thing in one post, and something else in another.

Dear Louis, admit you only bothered to get it because my last post included "French sarcasme". A more than typical key word to raise your attention level, wouldn't it be?

I love you anyway though, albeit not in that scary way SFTS does ;)

[Subotan]

Only North Korea would start a war, but only South Korea could win one.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Dear Louis, admit you only bothered to get it because my last post included "French sarcasme". A more than typical key word to raise your attention level, wouldn't it be?

I love you anyway though, albeit not in that scary way SFTS does ;)

I bothered to get it because I always try to work out what somebody actually means. I'll read and re-read, put myself into somebody else's position, work out the intention, until I get it.

I love myself too.


If I may - I think your posts are too agressive of tone lately. You know I'm not part of 'dislike Kadagar by default' people. But are you, for example, treating Centurion with due respect in this thread?

[gaelic cowboy]

Only North Korea would start a war, but only South Korea could win one.

Only a certifiable loon would start a war when the yanks are testing this kind of tech

[rotorgun]

japans 'defensive' activities could be to deploy naval forces as a defensive screen either side of the parallel which would free up SK naval forces otherwise committed to sanitising its own waters.

no readily causes a military incident when the other side has 10,000 artillery pieces within range of your capital, but if NK do start a war I expect the US/SK/Ja/Ch to finish it very quickly.

I can imagine Japan's navy in such a role as you suggest, although there would most likely be some serious rules of engagement issues for a Japanese commander to attend to. As to your second point, what more reason than to use this incident as an excuse to preemptively strike at such a target. I doubt that the North Koreans would expect such a response, considering the current history of the US dominated south's past responses to the north's threats of aggression. I think that the north will not move without solid support from China.

[Furunculus]

what more reason than to use this incident as an excuse to preemptively strike at such a target. I doubt that the North Koreans would expect such a response, considering the current history of the US dominated south's past responses to the north's threats of aggression. I think that the north will not move without solid support from China.

i see your point, but any democratically elected government is going to get raped at the election after a preemptive war in korea, because my guess is that at least a thousand large calibre artillary shells will land on soeul.

and korea is now in strategic control of korean defence, american leadership was relinquished recently.

[Shaka_Khan]

This is my point. I think they lack the political will, which the North may interpret as a go ahead for a preemptive strike, one that could cripple the South's military in such a way as to insure a protracted war. If the North were to act with alacrity, they might just win some major concessions in a negotiated settlement.

I'm sure South Korea would fight hard if she was invaded in a major way. Right now, North Korea isn't invading in a major way.
Remember what North Korea has near the South Korean capitol. It's not worth starting a major war when you could avoid it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Rotor:

I think SK has shown commendable restraint. The temptation to smart bomb an NK boat or two to make a point must have been compelling. Unfortunately, it wouldn't have done much more than their current response pattern.

Re: Japanese involvement:

They'll work on the naval side and provide awacs and sigint support. You will NOT see Japanese boots in Korea. There are WAY too many bad vibes from the past at play there for Japan to want to open that particular can of worms as well as a goodly cadre of domestic pacifists who want no Japanese military involvement in anything aside from the defense of Honshu. Short of a last-ditch defense of Pusan (which I don't think will happen again), the Japanese will not put ground troops in.

[Tellos Athenaios]

In fact Japan doing anything significant will likely prove counter-productive if the goal is to get China to drop NK. China may not like NK as much as it did; it still hates Japan much more so.

[Centurion1]

You mean aswacs I presume seamus?

[KukriKhan]

Only a certifiable loon would start a war when the yanks are testing this kind of tech

So that's what that racket was Wednesday. Church attendance skyrocketed on Thursday, the local senior citizens and religiously-inclined convinced "the end" was near.

[Moros]

Only a certifiable loon would start a war when the yanks are testing this kind of tech

Load the Hwacha!

[Meneldil]

According to the various sites linked by someone earlier in this thread, it looks like the biggest NK artillery cannot reach Seoul, even from the border. So it looks like the whole "Seoul will be razed to the ground as soon as the war starts" idea is a misconception.

[Furunculus]

do be a sport, and point us to those links.......... :)

[Meneldil]

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...es!-%282009%29 This one here.

The only gun that can reach Seoul from the border is the M-1978 Koksan. All of them are actually buried far away from there and are aimed at the border and not at Seoul.

Of course ,they have Scuds and what not too. But artillery wise, NK couldn't flatten Seoul in a matter of hours, since they'd have to move said artillery way south.

[Furunculus]

awesome news, thank you.

i rest much easier knowing that Seoul is less likely to suffer obliteration upon the demented actions of the north korean clown of state. :)

[Azathoth]

The only outcome of a modern Korean war that can be predicted with certainty is that everyone on the peninsula will be royally screwed.

Here's a scenario for you:

North Korea invades and levels a few square miles of Seoul. The damage to the capital's infrastructure and the shift toward a war footing will cripple the South Korean economy. A few weeks later the North Korean army is being mopped up, special forces are crawling all over Pyongyang and every single nuclear facility, and the former state will soon be jointly occupied by China, the South, the US, and the UN. The already badly strained South Korean economy will now have to deal with millions of malnourished refugees and the lack of any significant public infrastructure. The rest of the world must either lend Korea hundreds of billions or prepare for its total economic collapse.

The most tragically overlooked consequence of the war will be the devastation of the unique and incredibly fragile ecosystem that has flourished in the DMZ for the past 60 years.