iraq = not smart. North Korea = smart

[Terra Australis]

Hopefully the Korean Situation gets solved by diplomacy.......

The fact that the weapons inspectors have found warheaps that can be used to carry chemical agents in Iraq is most disturbing....

I knew it only to be a matter of time before there was some material that was found that would arouse suspicion.

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by Mirai
I didn't say 'The Region' I said 'North Korea'. I know full well that there are enough troops there to take on NK sucessfully. We just aren't preparing to attack NK like we are Iraq. And the reason for that, is because they have missles (or howitzers) that will fire on Seol if anyone crosses the DMZ.

and I am stating, quite plainly, that you're wrong. Seoul is a concern, but not even close to the reason.

We're not moving troops simply because there is NO need to do so.

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by Terra Australis

At the time of world war II there were two factions in China, democratic supporters and communist forces, they were in a limited war when Japan attacked, but made a pact to defend there homeland against the Japanese agressor.

The reason that Japan attacked Asia and consequently China in the first place, was because the U.S imposed sanctions against the Japanese for there taking of a small portion of China, and there thrusts into other parts of Asia.

The Japanese responce was to go to all out war to get the resources necessary to support the military machine.

The Japanese attacked the Soviet Union but were pushed back, this caused the Russians and the Japanese to sign a non agression pact, that was not broken till Russia declared war on the Japanese at the end of World War II.

No offense, but this is pretty much completely wrong, your scheduling is all screwed up.

Japan owned part of manchuria and China after the First world war when they took over the German colonies there. They invaded Northern China proper in 1931, and in 1938 increased the range of their attacks and swept through a huge part of the east of the Country. The infamous 'Rape of Nanking' was in 1938, 3 years efore any significant US sanctions were imposed.

China had a lOT more than two factions, and NONE of them were democratic, there were warlords, the communists and the very undemocratic national government, which could not control the outlying provinces. China was used by the japanese as a source of labour and esources, and as the beginning of their greater east asia Co-prosperity sphere. Japan has nothing in particular against the Chinese communists, in fact they tried to work with tham against the nationalist government sevral times. Communism had NOTHING to do with japanese actions in China.

The border skirmishes with Russia, while fairly large scale, were about posturing more than territory, neither (in 1936) had any real territorial designs on the other, though Japan did have a contingency war plan against the USSR, which was their primary war plan from 1937-1939.

The US sanctions did not start until early 1940, when japan took over the former French colonies of Indo China, and the independant state of Thailand.

Japan wanted war with the USSR in 1937-38, and that was their primary war plan, but the surprise nazi-Soviet pact of August 1939 made them totally revise their plans,and they developped a new plan based on southward expansion, which eventually brought them into conflict with the US.

[Terra Australis]

Thankyou for clearing that up for me, i knew some of the facts but not all of them, and i had a feeling that my timeline was wrong.....

You obviously study history etc... would be interested in seeing what else you know......

[Pilatus]

I never liked Hitler. But remeber he were one of the the biggest leaders in the 20th cenctutry.

Personally i think being a good leader should be besed on what your doing for the ppl. F.exc Bush is a much better leader then Hitler were. And plz don't get me to talk about that sick priest in norway

[Terra Australis]

Hitler did wonders in bringing the German economy out of the depression, and the conditions laid on it by the treaty of Versailes, at the end of WWI.

I mean building such grand schemes as the autobahns for rapid movement of transport etc..... they are still in place today.

But when he started persecuting the jews etc.... and basically lost it, that was when things began to go bad. He became a dictator after this beginning of racial persecution instead of a democratically elected leader.

Even more so when the war started, and then Hitler began to meddle to the running of the army, and how the generals who were professional soldiers...... Hitler began to countermand there orders, or change the way that they thought, so that any idea that did not appease Hitler...... made you lose favour with him.

But Hitler was the first politician to exploit the ideas of using the Mass media on addressing large numbers of the populace at once.

[Ärketrollmannen]

Vermillion, just when I know i have your attention

Do you think the third reich would have taken the buissness of NOT going to war.

Could the economy stay on it's high level of evelopment and the low(er) unemplyment rate etc.

What is your opinion?

[Starbucks]

im at the point of not giving a ****

they can do what they want

on there heads be it

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by Ärketrollmannen
[b]Vermillion, just when I know i have your attention

Do you think the third reich would have taken the buissness of NOT going to war.

Could the economy stay on it's high level of evelopment and the low(er) unemplyment rate etc.

Firstly, No, they were due to run into an economic roadblock around 1940-41, assuming no more territorial expansion after anschluss. There are ways around this, and it was not inevitable, but their remarkable growth was not sustainable. Read mark harrisson's 'Economics of WWII'. Great book.

If you want any more explanation, ask in a new thread, this is particularily not on topic ...