Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > International Forum
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

International Forum Discuss Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by loboloco This is particular to the North Korea situation, Wonder. There was never a peace treaty or ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 12:29 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,143
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 10,041 Times in 5,714 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
This is particular to the North Korea situation, Wonder. There was never a peace treaty or permanent cessation of hostilities signed backed in the 50's. This is a fact, and has nothing to do with whether congress does or doesn't do its job. A state of war already exists between North Korea and the United States. It was started by North Korean attacks in the 50's, and has never completely stopped. Thee are several incidents every year along the DMZ in Korea. Every single one of them instigated by North Korea. The simple fact is that we have been in a state of armed conflict with North Korea since the 1950's. There has never been a peace treaty, there has been ongoing, continuous provocations, and there is no international, legal bar for either side to recommence hostilities. This has nothing to do with whatever you were ranting about.
In the 50's congress authorized the ongoing military operations in Korea. Every year since, congress has voted to continue military operations in Korea. Since that is the case, congress has already agreed to whatever military operations are required.
It always amazes me that so many otherwise learned people, cannot fathom that this condition of war exists between the USA and north Korea and has been so since 1952.

The North Koreans stubbornly refuse to cease hostilities and have been in that modus since the beginning of the conflict. As a result, the North Koreans starve in middle ages society, whilst their neighbors, and often relatives, enjoy the prosperity of modernity.

The USA is actually no threat to the PRONK. If the PRONK did not threaten it's neighbors it could live in 14th century poverty and despair without outside interference. But it refuses to stop barking and biting it's neighbors. And thanks to the development of their nuclear and ballistic technology, we are now "one of their neighbors."

After close to 70 years of this condition, Bolton simply recognizes the futility of strategic patience. What of that is "illegal?"
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 12:36 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,226
Thanks: 9,311
Thanked 5,551 Times in 3,752 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
There is no armistice. There was, and continues to be, a negotiated cease fire. An entirely different thing. A negotiated cease fire is a temporary cessation of hostilities. This cease fire has been violated multiple times by North Korea firing into and at both US and ROK troops in the DMZ. WE have no reason or need to justify a resumption of hostilities because North Korea has never ceased hostilities.
North Korea refused to sign an armistice because it would recognize the legitimate right of South Korea to exist as a separate nation.
Under international law, either side can resume hostilities under a cease fire. This usually requires notice by the initiating side. However, a response to aggression requires nothing other than the will to do so. Any action by the United States fall under "response' to violations of the cease fire. These violations have been going on since the establishment of the DMZ. The last incident which occurred last year involved North Korean soldiers shooting a defector when he had crossed out of their territory into South Korea. This is, whether you realize it or not, a violation of cease fire. It is also a separate declaration of war by North Korea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
Also, Wonder, you should actually read what I write and quit trying to project your own fallacious arguments on what I say. I have said this is peculiar to the Korean situation. Nowhere have I tried to claim we are at war with south east Asia. Maybe you should back off on the painkillers or whatever you are taking.
"East Asia" is a reference to Orwell's 1984 use, where one day the gov't claims they are not at war the "east Asia" and the next day claim they "have always been at war with "East Asia".



Quote:
Transcript of Armistice Agreement for the Restoration of the South Korean State (1953)

July 27, 1953

Agreement between the Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command, on the one hand, and the Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army and the Commander of the Chinese People's volunteers, on the other hand, concerning a military armistice in Korea.

Preamble

The undersigned, the Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command, on the one hand, and the Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army and the Commander of the Chinese People's Volunteers, on the other hand, in the interest of stopping the Korean conflict, with its great toil of suffering and bloodshed on both sides, and with the objective of establishing an armistice which will insure a complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved, do individually, collectively, and mutually agree to accept and to be bound and governed by the conditions and terms of armistice set forth in the following articles and paragraphs, which said conditions and terms are intended to be purely military in character and to pertain solely to the belligerents in Korea:...

https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php...age=transcript
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 04-10-2018 at 12:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 12:46 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,226
Thanks: 9,311
Thanked 5,551 Times in 3,752 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
It always amazes me that so many otherwise learned people, cannot fathom that this condition of war exists between the USA and north Korea and has been so since 1952.

The North Koreans stubbornly refuse to cease hostilities and have been in that modus since the beginning of the conflict. As a result, the North Koreans starve in middle ages society, whilst their neighbors, and often relatives, enjoy the prosperity of modernity.
..
It always amazes me that so many otherwise learned people, cannot fathom that a real war would not allow "their neighbors, and often relatives, enjoy the prosperity of modernity."


and can't understand that the U.S. should honor the Armistice it's party to.
and especially honor the constitution.
Can't see an aggressive unprovoked military attack on another country that has not attacked it is an act of aggression. Except of course if it's perpetrated against us.

And huff about how they can't see anything "illegal" in attacking other countries without military provocation, without declaration or war, or anything else but a paranoid fear that another country MIGHT attack us.
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 01:17 PM
Scholar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 317
Thanked 1,692 Times in 1,036 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Wonder, you just made my point. That was a cease fire, not an armistice. And North Korea has violated that cease fire continuously. That we haven't reacted, other than economically or diplomatically is kudos fro us, but it doesn't preclude a resumption of hostilities our part. What I find really hard to understand is why you think that such restraint should be applied only to the US. Should the other parties involved also refrain from hostilities? If they don't(and they haven't), what other recourse do you suggest, or should the United States just allow its soldiers, its allies soldiers and citizens, and people attempting to escape a murderous regime to be gunned down, mortared, and shelled at will?
You can call a cease fire an armistice, doesn't make it one. You can call Foundit a neocon, don't make him one.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 01:17 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,143
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 10,041 Times in 5,714 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
It always amazes me that so many otherwise learned people, cannot fathom that a real war would not allow "their neighbors, and often relatives, enjoy the prosperity of modernity."


and can't understand that the U.S. should honor the Armistice it's party to.
and especially honor the constitution.
Can't see an aggressive unprovoked military attack on another country that has not attacked it is an act of aggression. Except of course if it's perpetrated against us.

And huff about how they can't see anything "illegal" in attacking other countries without military provocation, without declaration or war, or anything else but a paranoid fear that another country MIGHT attack us.
China/ North Korea is like a not so nice neighbor having a rabid dog. You can ask him, plead with him or even take him to court but he is more than happy to let you stew unable to make him curb his pet.

A pet that daily becomes more capable and eager to harm your children.

In the sense of a war declaration, you can huff all you want. Our state of war with PRONK is legal. However it is also just moronic. In this case the two definitions may be similar but not interchangeable.

To my mind, the thought of a "legal" war is an oxymoronic concept. I wonder then, how can one then be called "illegal?"
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 01:20 PM
Scholar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 317
Thanked 1,692 Times in 1,036 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
China/ North Korea is like a not so nice neighbor having a rabid dog. You can ask him, plead with him or even take him to court but he is more than happy to let you stew unable to make him curb his pet.

A pet that daily becomes more capable and eager to harm your children.

In the sense of a war declaration, you can huff all you want. Our state of war with PRONK is legal. However it is also just moronic. In this case the two definitions may be similar but not interchangeable.

To my mind, the thought of a "legal" war is an oxymoronic concept. I wonder then, how can one then be called "illegal?"
Actually, the terms legal and illegal don't apply in warfare. The better terms would be justified, and unjustified.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 01:40 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,143
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 10,041 Times in 5,714 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
Actually, the terms legal and illegal don't apply in warfare. The better terms would be justified, and unjustified.
Agreed.
A point I was clumsily trying to imply.


Hence my problem with the OP. And, with the thread title.

The USA has had troops "at War" many, many times. But not always with a Declaration.

That has happened only 11 times in our history.

Korea was not one of them. Does that make the entire war with PRONK illegal? It started long before Bolton came on the scene.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Last edited by FrancSevin; 04-10-2018 at 01:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 02:03 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,226
Thanks: 9,311
Thanked 5,551 Times in 3,752 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
Wonder, you just made my point. That was a cease fire, not an armistice. And North Korea has violated that cease fire continuously. That we haven't reacted, other than economically or diplomatically is kudos fro us, but it doesn't preclude a resumption of hostilities our part. What I find really hard to understand is why you think that such restraint should be applied only to the US. Should the other parties involved also refrain from hostilities? If they don't(and they haven't), what other recourse do you suggest, or should the United States just allow its soldiers, its allies soldiers and citizens, and people attempting to escape a murderous regime to be gunned down, mortared, and shelled at will?
You can call a cease fire an armistice, doesn't make it one. You can call Foundit a neocon, don't make him one.
So i guess even If President Trump proclaims it and tweets it an 'armistice', and the document itself says it's an armistice it's still not and armistice TO YOU.
got it.

And i'm not sure why you think it's strange that I think the U.S. should honor it's agreements, especially when it keeps the peace, and saves lives or Koreans and American soldiers, even if others go off the rails in ways that are egregious but livable.

"city on a hill" , "Americas the greatest country in the world" "America honorable and good", America and the flag "stand for truth justice", and all that.
unless all that stuff is just hype?


Quote:
Originally Posted by loboloco View Post
Actually, the terms legal and illegal don't apply in warfare. The better terms would be justified, and unjustified.
umm, So why all this "it's legal" jibberjabber then lobo?
You're asserting that we've been at war the whole time.
So the only real question for you is who gets to determine what exactly "justified" means.
Since no LAW, not even the constitution, i presume, really comes into play based on what you've said there.

just as i suspected.
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 04-10-2018 at 02:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 03:33 PM
Scholar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,403
Thanks: 317
Thanked 1,692 Times in 1,036 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
So i guess even If President Trump proclaims it and tweets it an 'armistice', and the document itself says it's an armistice it's still not and armistice TO YOU.
got it.

And i'm not sure why you think it's strange that I think the U.S. should honor it's agreements, especially when it keeps the peace, and saves lives or Koreans and American soldiers, even if others go off the rails in ways that are egregious but livable.

"city on a hill" , "Americas the greatest country in the world" "America honorable and good", America and the flag "stand for truth justice", and all that.
unless all that stuff is just hype?




umm, So why all this "it's legal" jibberjabber then lobo?
You're asserting that we've been at war the whole time.
So the only real question for you is who gets to determine what exactly "justified" means.
Since no LAW, not even the constitution, i presume, really comes into play based on what you've said there.

just as i suspected.
And in your suspicions you are so far off the mark you can't even find first base. History, not politicians called the so-called armistce with NK a ceasefire. A ceasefire that has been out of effect since 6 months after its initial signing by NK violations. This makes any response the US makes at any point past that initial violation legal.
Legality and illegality do not apply in warfare. Only just or unjust. Are the multiple attacks from NK justified? No. Is any response we wish to make justified? Yes. Both as a matter of warfare deterrence and under international law.

One other point. If congress pays for combat operations, or in any way alludes to use of force in their bills, then they have declared war under the constitutional provisions.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2018, 03:39 PM
FrancSevin's Avatar
Runs with scissors
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: St Louis MO
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,143
Thanks: 7,226
Thanked 10,041 Times in 5,714 Posts
Default Re: Boltonís Illegal War Plan for North Korea

Armistice;;;;
International law regarding armistices[edit]

Under international law an armistice is a legal agreement (often in a document) which ends fighting between the "belligerent parties" of a war or conflict.[2] The Hague II (1899) Treaty, says "If [the armistice's] duration is not fixed," the parties can resume fighting (Article 36) as they choose, but with proper notifications. This is in comparison to a "fixed duration" armistice, where the parties can renew fighting only at the end of the particular fixed duration. When the belligerent parties say (in effect), "this armistice completely ends the fighting" without any end date for the armistice, then duration of the armistice is fixed in the sense that no resumption of the fighting is allowed at any time. For example, the Korean Armistice Agreement calls for a "ceasefire and armistice" and has the "objective of establishing an armistice which will ensure a complete cessation of hostilities and of all acts of armed force in Korea until a final peaceful settlement is achieved.[3]

Given the belligerent acts of the PRONK ,,,,;Cessationof hostilities have not ended.

What is "illegal" about attempts by either party to defend their positions and/or force negotiations for peace via sanctions, embargoes or brinksmanship?

IE; "....turn your dog loose again around my kids and I will kill it.." A statement that means nothing unless you show that you are capable, and willing, to actually do it.
__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Last edited by FrancSevin; 04-10-2018 at 03:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boltonís, for, illegal, korea, north, plan, war

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0