[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Do you know how much money illegal immigrants send back home? They aren’t spending all that money HERE, it is being spent back in Mexico…So much for all the illegal immigrants ‘helping’ our economy.[/quote]

Could that be offset by the money that is saved by the businesses who hire illegals? I’d bet that corporations save more money by hiring illegals than what the illegals themselves make and send back to their homeland. Surely these savings are cycled back into the economy by the businesses.
[/quote]

I somehow feel the savings are NOT cycled back into the economy. Offshore accts? Swiss banks? Demand for lower tax?

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Do you know how much money illegal immigrants send back home? They aren’t spending all that money HERE, it is being spent back in Mexico…So much for all the illegal immigrants ‘helping’ our economy.[/quote]

Could that be offset by the money that is saved by the businesses who hire illegals? I’d bet that corporations save more money by hiring illegals than what the illegals themselves make and send back to their homeland. Surely these savings are cycled back into the economy by the businesses.
[/quote]

I somehow feel the savings are NOT cycled back into the economy. Offshore accts? Swiss banks? Demand for lower tax?

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Do you know how much money illegal immigrants send back home? They aren’t spending all that money HERE, it is being spent back in Mexico…So much for all the illegal immigrants ‘helping’ our economy.[/quote]

Could that be offset by the money that is saved by the businesses who hire illegals? I’d bet that corporations save more money by hiring illegals than what the illegals themselves make and send back to their homeland. Surely these savings are cycled back into the economy by the businesses.
[/quote]

I somehow feel the savings are NOT cycled back into the economy. Offshore accts? Swiss banks? Demand for lower tax?

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Do you know how much money illegal immigrants send back home? They aren’t spending all that money HERE, it is being spent back in Mexico…So much for all the illegal immigrants ‘helping’ our economy.[/quote]

Could that be offset by the money that is saved by the businesses who hire illegals? I’d bet that corporations save more money by hiring illegals than what the illegals themselves make and send back to their homeland. Surely these savings are cycled back into the economy by the businesses.
[/quote]

I somehow feel the savings are NOT cycled back into the economy. Offshore accts? Swiss banks? Demand for lower tax?

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Do you know how much money illegal immigrants send back home? They aren’t spending all that money HERE, it is being spent back in Mexico…So much for all the illegal immigrants ‘helping’ our economy.[/quote]

Could that be offset by the money that is saved by the businesses who hire illegals? I’d bet that corporations save more money by hiring illegals than what the illegals themselves make and send back to their homeland. Surely these savings are cycled back into the economy by the businesses.
[/quote]

I somehow feel the savings are NOT cycled back into the economy. Offshore accts? Swiss banks? Demand for lower tax?

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]”Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one.”[/quote]

Yes, so what are our options then? Continue to “appease?” Start a war to kick him out? Covert operations? Exploding cigars? Sounds like we’re content to let the old man play with his toys and let him bask in his own little ego in his own little world for a little while longer until he expires. What then?

The other option? A lengthy, bloody war resulting in tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead? Maybe a million? Is this the option that the anti-“appeasement” crowd would prefer?

At what point does pragmatism become appeasement, or vice versa?[/quote]

There isn’t really any good option. That’s why NK has survived as long as it has even though the other communist nations are gone, mostly.
No action can really be taken that will start a full scale war. No one’s content to let the situation simmer as it is but there simply isn’t any other option.

There is however one way out. And that way lies through a place called Beijing.

Very unfortunately, Beijing isn’t a very reliable partner in this situation. They’d much prefer to have NK stay as a satellite state and act as a buffer against US influence on the Asian continent. It’s BS that China doesn’t want NK to collapse to prevent the flood of hungry N Korea flooding China. China simply doesn’t want to lose a useful pawn in the game it’s playing with US. However it seems more and more that China’s calculation is coming back to bite itself. If you were leading China, which one would you want? A unified Korean peninsula stable/prosperous to trade with? Or a little brat that is N Korea that might give Japan the reason to arm up and possibly nukes?

Beijing has to realize it can’t have it both ways…

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]”Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one.”[/quote]

Yes, so what are our options then? Continue to “appease?” Start a war to kick him out? Covert operations? Exploding cigars? Sounds like we’re content to let the old man play with his toys and let him bask in his own little ego in his own little world for a little while longer until he expires. What then?

The other option? A lengthy, bloody war resulting in tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead? Maybe a million? Is this the option that the anti-“appeasement” crowd would prefer?

At what point does pragmatism become appeasement, or vice versa?[/quote]

There isn’t really any good option. That’s why NK has survived as long as it has even though the other communist nations are gone, mostly.
No action can really be taken that will start a full scale war. No one’s content to let the situation simmer as it is but there simply isn’t any other option.

There is however one way out. And that way lies through a place called Beijing.

Very unfortunately, Beijing isn’t a very reliable partner in this situation. They’d much prefer to have NK stay as a satellite state and act as a buffer against US influence on the Asian continent. It’s BS that China doesn’t want NK to collapse to prevent the flood of hungry N Korea flooding China. China simply doesn’t want to lose a useful pawn in the game it’s playing with US. However it seems more and more that China’s calculation is coming back to bite itself. If you were leading China, which one would you want? A unified Korean peninsula stable/prosperous to trade with? Or a little brat that is N Korea that might give Japan the reason to arm up and possibly nukes?

Beijing has to realize it can’t have it both ways…

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]”Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one.”[/quote]

Yes, so what are our options then? Continue to “appease?” Start a war to kick him out? Covert operations? Exploding cigars? Sounds like we’re content to let the old man play with his toys and let him bask in his own little ego in his own little world for a little while longer until he expires. What then?

The other option? A lengthy, bloody war resulting in tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead? Maybe a million? Is this the option that the anti-“appeasement” crowd would prefer?

At what point does pragmatism become appeasement, or vice versa?[/quote]

There isn’t really any good option. That’s why NK has survived as long as it has even though the other communist nations are gone, mostly.
No action can really be taken that will start a full scale war. No one’s content to let the situation simmer as it is but there simply isn’t any other option.

There is however one way out. And that way lies through a place called Beijing.

Very unfortunately, Beijing isn’t a very reliable partner in this situation. They’d much prefer to have NK stay as a satellite state and act as a buffer against US influence on the Asian continent. It’s BS that China doesn’t want NK to collapse to prevent the flood of hungry N Korea flooding China. China simply doesn’t want to lose a useful pawn in the game it’s playing with US. However it seems more and more that China’s calculation is coming back to bite itself. If you were leading China, which one would you want? A unified Korean peninsula stable/prosperous to trade with? Or a little brat that is N Korea that might give Japan the reason to arm up and possibly nukes?

Beijing has to realize it can’t have it both ways…

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]”Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one.”[/quote]

Yes, so what are our options then? Continue to “appease?” Start a war to kick him out? Covert operations? Exploding cigars? Sounds like we’re content to let the old man play with his toys and let him bask in his own little ego in his own little world for a little while longer until he expires. What then?

The other option? A lengthy, bloody war resulting in tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead? Maybe a million? Is this the option that the anti-“appeasement” crowd would prefer?

At what point does pragmatism become appeasement, or vice versa?[/quote]

There isn’t really any good option. That’s why NK has survived as long as it has even though the other communist nations are gone, mostly.
No action can really be taken that will start a full scale war. No one’s content to let the situation simmer as it is but there simply isn’t any other option.

There is however one way out. And that way lies through a place called Beijing.

Very unfortunately, Beijing isn’t a very reliable partner in this situation. They’d much prefer to have NK stay as a satellite state and act as a buffer against US influence on the Asian continent. It’s BS that China doesn’t want NK to collapse to prevent the flood of hungry N Korea flooding China. China simply doesn’t want to lose a useful pawn in the game it’s playing with US. However it seems more and more that China’s calculation is coming back to bite itself. If you were leading China, which one would you want? A unified Korean peninsula stable/prosperous to trade with? Or a little brat that is N Korea that might give Japan the reason to arm up and possibly nukes?

Beijing has to realize it can’t have it both ways…

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114][quote=dbapig]”Pyongyang has the ability to start a new Korean War, but not to survive one.”[/quote]

Yes, so what are our options then? Continue to “appease?” Start a war to kick him out? Covert operations? Exploding cigars? Sounds like we’re content to let the old man play with his toys and let him bask in his own little ego in his own little world for a little while longer until he expires. What then?

The other option? A lengthy, bloody war resulting in tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dead? Maybe a million? Is this the option that the anti-“appeasement” crowd would prefer?

At what point does pragmatism become appeasement, or vice versa?[/quote]

There isn’t really any good option. That’s why NK has survived as long as it has even though the other communist nations are gone, mostly.
No action can really be taken that will start a full scale war. No one’s content to let the situation simmer as it is but there simply isn’t any other option.

There is however one way out. And that way lies through a place called Beijing.

Very unfortunately, Beijing isn’t a very reliable partner in this situation. They’d much prefer to have NK stay as a satellite state and act as a buffer against US influence on the Asian continent. It’s BS that China doesn’t want NK to collapse to prevent the flood of hungry N Korea flooding China. China simply doesn’t want to lose a useful pawn in the game it’s playing with US. However it seems more and more that China’s calculation is coming back to bite itself. If you were leading China, which one would you want? A unified Korean peninsula stable/prosperous to trade with? Or a little brat that is N Korea that might give Japan the reason to arm up and possibly nukes?

Beijing has to realize it can’t have it both ways…

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114]Isn’t N. Korea’s military made up mostly of rusted out and broken down Cold War-era Soviet hardware? And aren’t their troops and populace in general poorly trained and weakened by famine?

I don’t know if these things are true — they’re just nuggets that I’ve heard a few times from various reporters who’ve managed to get in there. I am curious what the military-knowledgeable people here think about the above claims.[/quote]

Yes N Korea is utterly poor. Poorly trained and weakened.
There is no doubt that if a full scale war breaks out on the peninsula, N Korea will lose. The question is how bloody and how long and how much human suffering. And everyone knows it will be very very much so.
I am not however ask for appeasement. Just stating a fact.

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114]Isn’t N. Korea’s military made up mostly of rusted out and broken down Cold War-era Soviet hardware? And aren’t their troops and populace in general poorly trained and weakened by famine?

I don’t know if these things are true — they’re just nuggets that I’ve heard a few times from various reporters who’ve managed to get in there. I am curious what the military-knowledgeable people here think about the above claims.[/quote]

Yes N Korea is utterly poor. Poorly trained and weakened.
There is no doubt that if a full scale war breaks out on the peninsula, N Korea will lose. The question is how bloody and how long and how much human suffering. And everyone knows it will be very very much so.
I am not however ask for appeasement. Just stating a fact.

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114]Isn’t N. Korea’s military made up mostly of rusted out and broken down Cold War-era Soviet hardware? And aren’t their troops and populace in general poorly trained and weakened by famine?

I don’t know if these things are true — they’re just nuggets that I’ve heard a few times from various reporters who’ve managed to get in there. I am curious what the military-knowledgeable people here think about the above claims.[/quote]

Yes N Korea is utterly poor. Poorly trained and weakened.
There is no doubt that if a full scale war breaks out on the peninsula, N Korea will lose. The question is how bloody and how long and how much human suffering. And everyone knows it will be very very much so.
I am not however ask for appeasement. Just stating a fact.

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114]Isn’t N. Korea’s military made up mostly of rusted out and broken down Cold War-era Soviet hardware? And aren’t their troops and populace in general poorly trained and weakened by famine?

I don’t know if these things are true — they’re just nuggets that I’ve heard a few times from various reporters who’ve managed to get in there. I am curious what the military-knowledgeable people here think about the above claims.[/quote]

Yes N Korea is utterly poor. Poorly trained and weakened.
There is no doubt that if a full scale war breaks out on the peninsula, N Korea will lose. The question is how bloody and how long and how much human suffering. And everyone knows it will be very very much so.
I am not however ask for appeasement. Just stating a fact.

[dbapig]

[quote=afx114]Isn’t N. Korea’s military made up mostly of rusted out and broken down Cold War-era Soviet hardware? And aren’t their troops and populace in general poorly trained and weakened by famine?

I don’t know if these things are true — they’re just nuggets that I’ve heard a few times from various reporters who’ve managed to get in there. I am curious what the military-knowledgeable people here think about the above claims.[/quote]

Yes N Korea is utterly poor. Poorly trained and weakened.
There is no doubt that if a full scale war breaks out on the peninsula, N Korea will lose. The question is how bloody and how long and how much human suffering. And everyone knows it will be very very much so.
I am not however ask for appeasement. Just stating a fact.

[Author]

Posts