Probably the same thing that happened 15 years ago when I was there and has been happening for a long time. The North will do stuff for whatever domestic reason they need to (new leader, famine, etc). Then the US and the South will get all indignant, the North will continue being bellicose and but back down. Then the cycle will repeat in 6 months or a year. Either that or it will lead to nuclear armageddon.
Then we go to war and Haliburton makes more gazillions, most of the world dies, and the corporate sponsors all live underground in (already built) bunkers, and the wealth is all theirs to divide up amongst themselves. Republicans rejoice as more war is born. George Bush starts giving press conferences again. (PS....somebody find out where George's brother Marvin is up to...I heard he's headin' up security for the next attack that'll make 911 look like an amusement park merry go round.
That is an odd post considering the party that is now Commander in Chief...and still leading the war parties.
Sorry...I didn't realize the succeeding President was supposed to instantly discontinue the preceding President's mess in the war arena. I didn't realize is was that simple. Just say stop and we stop. Turn off the light switch instantly. Stop all wars/invasions instantly and bring everybody home. Just snap his fingers and it's done. I gotta admit, I hadn't considered that possibility. Nice idea but somehow I think the practical application of that idea MAY be a bit more difficult and require a bit more forethought than that. I could be wrong though.
Instantly? It has been a little while, ya know. And we are still in Iraq and will continue to be. And the war in Afghanistan has done nothing but get larger and been extended to at least 2014...after 2011 was the date. You may have missed that since they are just dropping it here and there so the public can get used to the idea before 2011 gets here. And, if the wars were just a republican + corporate money grab as your post seems to allude to, then why would they not just be able to stop them in a year and a half or two years? Seriously, even if they weren't that, you could end them in 2 years. But, the fact is, we are not really trying to end our endeavors there under this President any more than we were under the last one. I don't blame Obama for the wars but I do think he has to get the blame for continuing them at this point.
Combat ops are pretty much over in Iraq. Lotsa troops and equipment out, but, yeah true, we're still there. Afghanistan was so badly ignored by Bush while he had to go get the guy who threatened his daddy in Iraq, I'm not sure Afghanistan is a very simple exit either. I agree we don't belong there but the cash dictates that we stay there I think. Poppy fields to control (and we DO have our hands in that little drug deal, I assure you), war machines to bill the citizens of the US for via Hali-CheneyBurton. The roots are deep is all I'm sayin'. I would like for the prez to get us out of there, but I don't think it's possible anytime soon. Bush insured that much for us.
Yes, Combat Operations in Iraq are over. But, US troops are still dying over there and we are still there. I hope to be wrong but I think we are there for the same reason we are still in Korea...because of a certain neighbor involved...and I really hope I am wrong but I don't think we will leave. We never seem to leave regardless of the party in charge. And I really doubt Afghanistan will be any more of a country when we leave 4 or 5 or 10 years from now (if we ever do leave) than they are now. They never have been a country. And we sure as heck aren't there because of terrorists any more. Maybe Obama wants us there because of the opium or maybe it is because of the huge pile of Lithium they are sitting on that we will need to power all of our Chevy Volts with. Dunno...but it isn't terrorists any more. They have proven they can easily move to Pakistan and Yemen and any of a number of other crap holes around the world. In Afghanistan, we are pretty much fighting Taliban now...and what are/were they? A political group. It would be easy to leave Afghanistan but the current President doesn't have the will to do it. In fact, he is doing the opposite. Digging in for the long haul.
I think I've said this before but...hard to argue with you. I hadn't considered the lithium angle. Good point. I just know the administration that occupied the White House for nearly all of the first decade of the 21st century made damn sure they dug us in so deep that it would never be easy to get out of. It also almost makes me sick when I hear the shills blaming the mess on Obama in less than two years that took nearly a decade to create, and ignoring what and who got us there in the first place. Wreck the place and blame it on the next guy, obstruct, then obstruct more, demand raises for the wealthy and rail against the left for running up debt. Makes me puke. Anyway...drugs, lithium, whatever. It's as always...all about hoards of cash for the elite.
South Korea sailor and marine servicemen gave up their lives and few think of them because they are only a small cog on a big gear. It is a good thing that I am not President because I would not use a big stick but gunpower (gunpower and gunpowder equally apply) and steel. Just kidding because I would continue the appeasement in order to keep our 401Ks from becoming zero. Cretin that I am.
On the 401K part. You do realize that a lot of people's 401K's already went bust. Oh, by the way..a republican was in the White House at the time, but, Obama might have been thinking of running for President at the time so it's probably HIS fault and not the party of the rich (the would be the right wing party's representative, lest you forget).
Frankly, war in Korea is the last thing either side wants. The Kims (Jong Il and Jong Un) will lose their little fiefdom if they ever really re-start the war. And they know. China knows it too. A renewal of the war does a number of things to China, none of them good from the Chinese perspective: 1a) American troops on the Chinese border (Russia would be none too thrilled as well) 1b) which means China would have three nations on its border with nuclear weapons 2) Chinese economy tanks (it's dependent on its holding of US debt, which the US would default on if the war resumed) 3) US Navy sweeps People's Liberation Army Navy (the Chinese Navy) from the seas 4) Japan gets in on the winning side 5) Taiwan too. And this is before Vietnam, the Philippines, Tibet, et al start taking advantage of the distraction. Nothing is so permanent as a temporary solution.
Those that fail to learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them, also known as doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. They have nukes that can be delivered in a Buick Skylark. They are rats caught in a trap and rats are cannibals who eat their own tails when starving. I used to work at a feed mill.
