« 回到论坛
版主：
AminaYasmine, Liamjod, mnopq
 作者 |
 发布
|
 |
|
Luke Lieberman
连接： Feb 13, 2003
邮件 156
帖子等级
喋喋不休
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 30
国家：United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 01:49 AM
|
|
Since we are drifting away from the main subject - namely if Kim Jung Il should have nuclear weapons -
I'm going to bounce off these subjects all together for a moment and simply Ask - Udara - how are the releif efforts in Sri Lanka going?
Is the worst over, has a continual source of clean water been provided and distributed?
are the Hospitals now able to handle their workload?
what is being done to help/protect the Orphans, I imagine there must be many of them, I have also heard reports of sexual preditors trying to take advantage of the situation.
Is there perhaps a progrram being set up to match Orphans up with parents who have lost chilren who can take care of the orphans?
has Sri Lanka set about rebuilding housing and infrastrcture - or is it still dealing with the purely humanitarian needs of the disaster?
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 02:01 AM
|
|
Yeah, I will put this whole update on relief issue very soon. I am now back in Colombo!
BTW Luke,can you reply to some of these issues relating to afghanistan and the present conditions.
I really want to discuss this issue about war lords with you guys, I am waiting if Haseeb if available to share his thoughts also!
War lords and opium are THRIVING right now,no sign of wanning what so ever!!!! if you guys want, i have more articles regarding this with me.
This is where i think the credibility matters with US policy and its puppets.
Udara
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 02:18 AM
|
|
>Ajay - homeboy give me a break
PLEASE Lets cut it out with name calling since it may lead the discussion to someother way.
Anyway, this discussion is most interesting. Specially on the WW2 . PLEAASE keep the discussion going.
Udara
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Luke Lieberman
连接： Feb 13, 2003
邮件 156
帖子等级
喋喋不休
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 30
国家：United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 02:53 AM
|
|
I will discuss Afghanistan - but this thread is about Korea - so I want to stick with the main issue for a little longer -
here is how the Korean war started - because people here obviously need more context.
The Korean war started exactly like this:
http://www.korean-war.com/TimeLine/1950/06-25to08-03-50.html
"June 25, 1950
At approximately 4 a.m. (Korean Standard Time) on a rainy Sunday morning Democratic People's Republic of Korea Army (DPRK - North Korea) artillery and mortars open fire on Republic of Korea (ROK - South Korea) Army positions south of the 38th Parallel, the line then serving as the border between the two countries. The opening barrage is followed shortly by tank/infantry attacks at all points along the Parallel. At 11 a.m. North Korea announced a formal declaration of war and what is now known as "The Korean War" officially began. In this announcement North Korea claimed ROK forces on the Ongjin Peninsula attacked North Korea in the Haeju area (west) and their declaration of war was in response to this attack. This claim was bogus.
U.S. President Harry S. Truman was notified of the invasion and returned from his home in Independence, Missouri, to Washington, D.C., arriving in early afternoon. Meanwhile the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution calling for the immediate cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of North Korean forces to north of the 38th Parallel.
June 26, 1950
Uijongbu falls to North Korean forces. South Korean government - President Syngman Rhee and cabinet - leave Seoul for Taejon.
President Truman meets with State Department and Defense Department officials. He authorizes General Douglas MacArthur to:
(1) send ammunition and equipment to prevent the loss of Seoul,
(2) provide ships and aircraft to evacuate American citizens, plus Air Force fighters and Navy ships to protect the evacuation, and
(3) send a survey party to Korea to study the situation and determine how best to help the ROK government and military. Later in the day President Truman expanded his instructions by ordering General MacArthur to use Air Force aircraft and Navy ships against all North Korean military targets south the 38th Parallel. General MacArthur issues an "alert order" telling all combat units in the Far East to prepare for possible deployment to Korea.
June 27, 1950
U.S. Ambassador Muccio & staff leave Seoul for Suwon. ROK Army headquarters leave Seoul for Sihung-ni (about 5 miles south of Yongdungp'o) without informing their U.S. advisors with the Korean Military Advisory Group (KMAG.) KMAG follows ROKA Hq to Sihung-ni shortly thereafter. After discussions, most of ROKA Hq and KMAG return to Seoul a few hours later.
During the late evening, the U.N. Security council passes a resolution calling for member nations to give military aid to South Korea.
Meanwhile, in compliance with President Truman's order to provide help to South Korea and the use of U.S. air and naval forces south of the 38th Parallel, General MacArthur sent a fact finding group, headed by Brig. General Church, to Korea. This group left Japan at approximately 4 a.m. and arriving at Suwon in the early afternoon where they set up a temporary headquarters.
A U.S. Air Force F-82 shoots down a North Korean Yak fighter for the first U.S. air victory of the war. Two more North Korean aircraft are shot down a few minutes later in this same battle."
Understand - the idea that South Korea was or is planning to invade North Korea is a joke.
In fact the Boarder between North Korea and South Korea - the DMZ - is along the 38th Parrallel - the North Koreans literally decided the demarcation line when they attacked the South.
The North invaded the South in Korea - there is no mystery about this.
Now if you are saying that at this point most South Koreans would like to see Kim Jung Il out of power - I imainge that this true - I don't blame them.
Kim has Nuclear weapons and Ballitic missles - he has the invasion of their country as expressed government policy - he has kidnapped Japanse and South Korean officals and politicans and simply kept them.
and he has turned North Korean society into a conformist military facist regeime.
But you right - the poor defenseless North - which is bristling with weapons and a 1 million man army - is threatened by South Korea - right.
And if you are asking if most Americans would like to see Kim go I thik the answer is a simple "yes please".
it would releive us of a burden - we have heavy economic ties with both Japan and South Koea - we have to protect them - we have a treaty with Japan -
and if North Korea was not so militaristic it would seriously alleiveite alot of concerns -
basically we would not have to keep thousands of troops there if the North wasn't so dangerous.
As to Rumsfeild saying that we can fight a war against Korea and Iraq at once -
of course he said that - what else is he going to say "well we really have our hands full in Iraq - that is why we are shifting troops - we can't fight both fronts so if the North Koreans invade there is little we can do."
is that what you think he would say?
We have under 100,000 troops there for the first time in 50 years - and if Kim has Nukes it doesn't really matter how many troops we have on the boarder.
Basically if the North launched an offensive - even if it started conventional - it would be an entirely different kind of conflict - troops wouldn't matter - it would be fought in the air.
The reason China is dragging North Korea to the table is because China is nicely growing their economy right now - they don't need instability right now - and instability is what a Nuclear North Korea means.
Honestly - wake up.
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Ajay Kamalakaran
连接： Oct 19, 2004
邮件 6
帖子等级
说话温和
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 31
国家：India
Province/State: Karnataka
城市: Bangalore
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 03:38 AM
|
|
Udara
Thanks for the invite. I'll be back in Sri Lanka soon!
As for the USSR and World War 2, I suggest you read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich : A History of Nazi Germany by WILLIAM L. SHIRER
This is the best book written on World War 2 and you will see the role of the USSR in defeating Hitler.
A couple of basic facts
-90% of German casualities fell on the Eastern Front
-The USSR called for opening a Western Front in early 1943, but D-Day only happenned when the Allies were certain that Germany would lose the war.
I am not trying to diminish D-Day because those men who charged the beaches of Normandy were heroes in ways that no generation since has or will even dream of imagining.
But, in all fairness, the Soviets defeated the Nazis. The allies played a part, but the Soviets faced 80% of the Wehrmacht and it took them four bloody years to push the Wehrmacht back to Berlin. The Wehrmacht and Nazi Germany bled the Red Army dry.
Germany had commited henious atrocities in the Soviet Union and ravaged their land. By the end of World War 2, the Soviet Union was in shambles and disarray. The real turning point of the Second World War was the Nazi defeat at Stalingrad.
While the Allies played a part, the Soviet Union defeated Nazi Germany.
Like I said Udara, read that book or any unbiased neutral account of what happenned.
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 03:40 AM
|
|
>I know there are still warlords - but their day is >wanning.
Wanning ? Where exactly in Afghanistan ?
Some afghan guy few days back told that their PM is considered as the PM of Kabul not the Afghanistan among some rural villages!!
Haseeb was telling that day that the USA is actually backing up war lords creating problems for their government it self!!
Anyway, I would like to hear more on some solid evidence on wanning war lords in afghanistan ?
Udara
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 04:02 AM
|
|
http://www.afghannews.net/index.php?action=show&type=news&id=2010
US-led coalition continues to support Afghan warlords
27. February 2005, 01:47
By Mariana Baabar
ISLAMABAD (The News) - The United States and other international supporters of President Hamid Karzai are not serious in withdrawing support from militia commanders and regional warlords inside Afghanistan, as the US-led coalition mostly rely on these chieftains in its operations against al-Qaeda and Taliban. The international coalition is rather empowering them militarily and economically at the expense of the central government, said reliable sources.
Sometime back The News had extensively reported on how the US-led coalition and President Karzai himself were reluctant to move against these warlords for political reasons, under whose supervision poppy fields flourish and consequently drug barons prosper.
"The coalition must not give political, military or economic support to any commander who refuses to accept Kabul’s authority," said Samina Ahmed, South Asia project director of International Crisis Group (ICG).
The ICG like many other independent groups and individuals is worried about the future of Afghanistan where the US-led coalition takes one step forward and two backward to ignore the militia commanders in the name of stability to the Afghan nation.
The ICG says even the two years old process of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) of forces, known as Afghanistan’s New Beginning Programme (ANBP), has worrying gaps and weaknesses. If these are not addressed soon, militia networks will remain a key destructive element in the country’s political and economic life.
"DDR is vital for Afghanistan, but the ultimate fate of the process is now under serious question," says Robert Templer, director of Crisis Group’s Asia Programme.
The ANBP has not made significant inroads in disarming the powerful Tajik-dominated units in Kabul and the Panjsher. It has also not kept pace with the evolving nature of Afghanistan’s militias associated with governors or district administrators. And it is now starting to make tentative plans for tackling the threat posed by unofficial militias, which have been outside its mandate. These militias are maintained by most contending regional and local forces, including registered political parties.
Political and military analysts in Afghanistan increasingly recognize that there has been a fundamental change in the commanders’ priorities during the past three years. Most no longer see the need to maintain large stocks of heavy weaponry, since the coalition presence precludes the waging of open warfare. Instead, they have opted to maintain leaner, lighter armed forces adequate to protect their political, military and economic interests, including narcotics trafficking.
US Protection and Investigations (USPI) is a private American security company. A majority of the men on the USPI payroll are associated with private militias and have not gone through any formal DDR channels. Many have used their authority to engage in criminal activity including drug trafficking, charges the ICG.
Militia leaders have frequently managed to subvert DDR with the tacit support of the central government and/or the US-led coalition. A key element in this is the reassignment of Afghanistan Military Forces (AMF) commanders to civilian posts, particularly as governors and police chiefs.
These offices fall outside the ambit of ANBP, so commanders can employ their former militiamen as police, maintain patronage links with sub-commanders, and protect their economic interests.
A commander on the Kabul-Kandahar road reportedly transported large quantities of heroin from Shajui in Zabul province to Helmand, the province bordering Kandahar, using marked highway police vehicles and police armed with machineguns and AK-47 rifles. Although the commander was dismissed after US military forces uncovered his activities, he is said to retain command over the highway police in his sector and remains involved in narcotics trafficking.
"The disarmament process is not solely about collecting weapons," says Samina Ahmed, "it is also about transforming Afghan lives".
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 04:04 AM
|
|
Please Luke and others, have a look at this site:
http://www.rawa.org/
The truth in Afghanistan / war lords indeed is very bitter!!
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Ajay Kamalakaran
连接： Oct 19, 2004
邮件 6
帖子等级
说话温和
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 31
国家：India
Province/State: Karnataka
城市: Bangalore
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 09:55 AM
|
|
Thanks for the link Udara!
This is from RAWA's Women's Day Press Release
"Taliban savagery, though prevailed in cemetery silence over Afghanistan, but when they showed their disobedience to their American creators by aligning themselves with the Al-Qaeda terrorists after September 11, their medieval government evaporated. This did not demolish their military power; instead the blood of over 3,000 innocent Afghan people was shed. Upon the Taliban's dissolution, the U.S. and her allies transferred political power to the murderous "Northern Alliance" criminals who are far more misogynist and anti-human rights themselves."
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 10:28 AM
|
|
> troops wouldn't matter - it would be >fought in the air
But the ground reality even after bombing a heck out of North Korea as it was with Iraq, you still need to be sending troops and thats going to be a the toughest part.
Specially if those guys are really having nuclear weapons, in such a conflict, it will go to the hands of various anti American groups who will be fighting Americans in Korea.
And I dont think USA got the ability to monitor and destroy all nuclear weapons thinking of how it failed to catch up Osama..
Anyway, Its wise for both North Korea and USA to avoid this conflict!
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 10:45 AM
|
|
Ajay, My friend Haseeb from Afghanistan was telling me and Mitu the same thing few days back over a chat.
US administration must STOP the support to war lords than merely showing off elections to the world.
(I do agree that election in Afghanistan is an achievement to some extent YET! ........)
Udara
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Udara
连接： Dec 10, 2003
邮件 55
帖子等级
爱说话的
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 25
国家：Sri Lanka
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 10:57 AM
|
|
Brian around here ??
Maybe you would like to bookmark
http://www.rawa.org/election_e.htm
Luke, you also have a look!
Udara
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Desert ROSE
连接： Jan 27, 2004
邮件 5
帖子等级
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 女性, 22
国家：Jordan
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 11:02 AM
|
|
i don't know why is it forbidden 4 some countries to have nuclear weapons when it's aloud 4 others and try to convinse us that USA can it's the only country that decides who can and can't have weapons when the truth is that it's the one starting wars and invading countries and don't tell me they make it to make ppl free body bcoz it's not true that's what they tell thier ppl but the truth is the complete opposite and why are those who don't agree on the USA rules r always threatend and forsed to accept the rules of USA when they do nothing about WMD in some specific countries?
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Ajay Kamalakaran
连接： Oct 19, 2004
邮件 6
帖子等级
说话温和
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 31
国家：India
Province/State: Karnataka
城市: Bangalore
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 11:10 AM
|
|
Luke,
Name calling won't help prove your point.
You speak about WMDs and Massacres. Here's a link for you.
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/usgenocide/HiroshimaNagasaki.html
The bombing of Japanese cities continued the strategy of saturation bombing to destroy civilian morale; one nighttime fire-bombing of Tokyo took 80,000 lives. (Zinn points out in the book that “nighttime bombing” was by its very nature indiscriminate, not aimed primarily at military targets.)
And then, on August 6, 1945, came the lone American plane in the sky over Hiroshima, dropping the first atomic bomb, leaving perhaps 100,000 Japanese dead, and tens of thousands more slowly dying from radiation poisoning.
Twelve U.S. navy fliers in the Hiroshima city jail were killed in the bombing, a fact that the U.S. government has never officially acknowledged, according to historian Martin Sherwin (“A World Destroyed”).
Three days later, a second atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki, with perhaps 50,000 killed.
The justification for these atrocities was that this would end the war quickly, making unnecessary an invasion of Japan. Such an invasion would cost a huge number of lives, the government said — a million, according to Secretary of State Byrnes; half a million, Truman claimed was the figure given by General George Marshall. (When the papers of the Manhattan Project — the project to build the atom bomb — were released years later, they showed that Marshall urged a warning to the Japanese about the bomb, so people could be removed and only military targets hit.)
These estimates of invasion losses were not realistic, and seem to have been pulled out of the air to justify bombings which, as their effects became known, horrified more and more people.
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
Ajay Kamalakaran
连接： Oct 19, 2004
邮件 6
帖子等级
说话温和
用户是：
下线
性别和年龄： 男性, 31
国家：India
Province/State: Karnataka
城市: Bangalore
|
Re: Proliferation of WMDs
March 12, 2005 - 11:26 AM
|
|
As for your views on the Soviet role in defeating Nazi Germany, I don't expect them to be different as American History Textbooks are blatantly biased. I graduated from Bronx Science High School in New York (Heard of it?)
When most Americans think of WW2 they think of:
1. Hitler
2. Concentration camps
3. Pearl Harbour
4. D-day
5. Battle of the bulge
6. US captures berlin
7. US wins the war
What many people dont know is that by the time the Allies invaded Normandy, the Fascists were in full retreat on the Eastern Front, and had recieved two very major defeats.
Then they let the Red Army capture Berlin and took all of the credit for it.
Unfortuanatly, even though the cold war is over, when most Americans look at Russia they see:
1. Stalin
2. Berlin Wall
3. Cold War
4. Evil
5. Communism (a very distorted view, more like Stalinism)
And when Americans look at the Red army during WW2 (if they even know they were allies) they see:
1. Poorly equiped army
2. Bad weapons
3. Horrible tactics
4. An army of poor people who were brainwashed into throwing away their lives by Stalin
5. An army that lost more men from their own blocking units than they did from the germans
6. Enemy at the gates
7. Primitive equipement
The level of ignorance many Americans have about this subject is hardly shocking.
Going by my old history textbook, the amount of credit that is given to the Russians for winning WW2 echoes Luke's views. In fact it barely even metions the USSR's efforts.
Basically it says that Stalin and Hitler were allies but then Hitler invaded them and so they were forced to ally with the US and then Stalingrad happened. And half of the section about Stalingrad was just a qoute from a German officer. And then later on when it talks about the end of the war it says that the Russians got to Berlin first so they took it.
And in the page long section about Women's Combat Roles in WW2 only 1 sentence is devoted to the Soviet Women's participation.
I advise you read accounts of the War publsihed across the Atlantic, including those by British and French authors or you will stay permanently in your blissful ignorant state.
As for North Korea,
Your link is a completely biased and one-sided look into the Korean War.
Whether you accept it or not, the South's refusal to recognise the North as a seperate country makes the North feel threatened. In addition to non-recognition, the South waves the American support and taunts the North.
I don't support the North's system of governance but I believe that they have the right to not be bombed or invaded by America.
America has no legal case to invade the country and if it chooses to do so, it will suffer the reprecussions.
|
|
回到顶部 |
链接这个地址
|
|
|
从帖子中显示：
|
|
主页
团体
