morepork wrote:It's like a special needs individual attempting to commit a burglary with flour, melted chocolate and their own semen on their hands, yet the authorities seem incapable of connecting the dots.

It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?
How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?
It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.
Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?
And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuateStones of granite wrote:It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?
How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?
It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.
Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?
Really?Stones of granite wrote:It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?
How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?
It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.
Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?
Good point.Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate
I bow to your greater expertise in matters of planning and exercise in complex, joint, inter-organisational context. Here was me foolishly thinking that it would be quite difficult to maintain a capability without regular practice, and it turns out you only have try it once.WaspInWales wrote:Really?Stones of granite wrote:It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.WaspInWales wrote:Tbh, what do these US/SK drills achieve that the previous one failed to achieve?
How many times can they fire a weapon or explode something and learn something new?
It's clearly provocation designed to let NK know that their neighbour has a powerful ally.
Surely in the current, or recent climate of improved diplomacy, someone would've had the common sense to cancel any more war games?!?
Good point.Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate
Let the war games commence.
Ok, so the US and SK will be the goodies and NK are the baddies. We're just going to simulate what might happen if a war starts. Seems straightforward enough.
The fact that this has been done a dozen or so times already, and many different annual simulations have been conducted many, many, many times before only proves the US and SK want to stay sharp in order to counter the threat from NK.
What utter bollocks.
You'd think that in thawing relations, there would be a thaw in behaviour.
Now Trump will accuse NK of reneging, or backing out at the same time as preparing and undertaking a hostile training exercise.
Again, utter bollocks.
Thank you, unless you're being sarcastic. It may just be too subtle for me.Stones of granite wrote:I bow to your greater expertise in matters of planning and exercise in complex, joint, inter-organisational context. Here was me foolishly thinking that it would be quite difficult to maintain a capability without regular practice, and it turns out you only have try it once.WaspInWales wrote:Really?Stones of granite wrote: It’s a bit like asking why your company has a fire drill every six months, as everyone still knows what the alarm sounds like and where to stand in the car park after the one they had in 1997.
Good point.Digby wrote:And even then people can get confused whether they're supposed to evacuate or invacuate
Let the war games commence.
Ok, so the US and SK will be the goodies and NK are the baddies. We're just going to simulate what might happen if a war starts. Seems straightforward enough.
The fact that this has been done a dozen or so times already, and many different annual simulations have been conducted many, many, many times before only proves the US and SK want to stay sharp in order to counter the threat from NK.
What utter bollocks.
You'd think that in thawing relations, there would be a thaw in behaviour.
Now Trump will accuse NK of reneging, or backing out at the same time as preparing and undertaking a hostile training exercise.
Again, utter bollocks.
WaspInWales wrote:How does he continue to get away with attacking political opponents like this:
In some circumstances and places, just posting crap/rumour/lies about someone online could land a person in trouble, but here we have the POTUS publicly trying to shame an opponent by suggesting they don't care about key issues, but that's ok.
I know the first amendment is pretty hallow in the US, but I thought that false statements and such that could cause harm to reputations of an individual or business are not covered by constitutional free speech, so I'm just amazed he can continue to do this.
Some key words to pick out of that depending on one's viewWaspInWales wrote:
Perhaps he was hoping early reports would be good?