FedaykinAt what point did I say it was impossible SlowMan? I am saying it would take many years of investment to build a modern power infrastructure in the North. The Kaesung Industrial complex is one small facility right next to the DMZ built from scratch, that is a far simpler prospect then totally rebuilding a modern power infrastructure in the north. As pointed out that would have to include power stations as well. You seem to be under the impression that this is a quick and easy thing, at no point did I say it was impossible but I am questioning your supreme confidence in easily this will be done.
FedaykinIt should be noted it isn’t an actual carriage trial on an actual airframe. A wind tunnel test on a model is it stands.
Probably a potential customer would like it as an option, personally I think carrying two missiles and retaining the centreline station for a fuel tank is the most logical option.
FedaykinSlowMan
The power used in Kaesung Industrial complex and Kaesung city comes from the South right now. Just do it on a grander scale.
One industrial complex right next to the DMZ built at great expense with the acquiescence of the NK government. It is not a like for like scenario, Kim il SlowMan
FedaykinDeino:
towards NK and SK and most of all Your arrogance is annoying !
You mean his arrogance I hope Deino 😉
FedaykinSo the answer is no then!
Quote:
You have no concerns about the duty of care you have to them in such a scenario and you assume that they are quietly going to roll over and take that kind of situation?SlowMans answer:
This why the seal-off is so important in making this happen.
FedaykinGyeongbu Expressway was built I presume by a workforce that was well fed and housed people willing to build said road? Again you assume that a starving population is just going to happily roll over and do this when their priorities might lie elsewhere!
The power will come from the South?
Errr how? That presumes that there is a power infrastructure to handle it.
So NK workers can be taught like migrant workers? That is how you see people who are technically the same nationality as yourself. Migrant workers to plough into a major infrastructure project for the benefit of the great ROK! Kind of sounds familiar I wonder who has pushed that kind of thing on the NK population :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEnFB5ngnSA
You appear to be working under this assumption that the NK population are going to happily going to jump to work for their new SK masters building the industrial powerhouse of the newly reintegrated ROK!
I think you might be surprised about how it really works out…
FedaykinTo be honest your attitude to your North Korean brethren is rather worrying SlowMan!:confused:
So what you are effectively saying is: seal them up and work them in conditions of virtual slave labour to rapidly build this new industrial infrastructure that will make Korea the industrial powerhouse greater then China, Japan and the rest of Asia put together. The NK are there purely to provide cheap labour and damn their humanitarian needs?
You have no concerns about the duty of care you have to them in such a scenario and you assume that they are quietly going to roll over and take that kind of situation?
FedaykinSlowman further to your earlier assertion, you can’t just slap down 8 lane highways and a fully modernised rail infrastructure just like that! It takes years of planning (sometimes decades – just look at Crossrail!) and decades to build! Add to that modernising a nearly non existent outside of Pyongyang power infrastructure and a population lacking in the skills to enable a rapid modernisation and your ideas are wildly off the mark albeit a strangely gleeful talk about SK managers working a virtual slave army of NK workers.
FedaykinWhile I agree SlowMan that the South could smash the North Korean armed forces albeit at a fairly bloody cost it is the day after which is the problem.
Even after keeping the DMZ place to stop the refugee stampede the South would have a duty of care to millions of new, starving and after a war probably homeless Koreans. It would be a humanitarian nightmare for the South and the global community in general. Not counting trying to disarm the rest of the NK military who might just decide to use heavy weaponry to help feed themselves.
FedaykinSeahawk has it right, the reunification of Germany is a different situation!
The East Germans were by in large well fed and in some form of work, whilst it was a very costly exercise for the West with many problems since (including poverty) the population they were integrating were not brain washed and starving! The East Germans had all the infrastructures of a working society even if it was imperfect and in need of modernisation.
North Korea on the other hand relies on World Food Aid to feed its population who are starving, brainwashed, lacking in jobs and skills suitable for a modern economy. Unlike East Germany the infrastructure can barely support its population and is in urgent need of not only modernisation but setting up in many cases. Add to that the problem of the huge military which for many NK citizens there main source of housing, work and food. Whilst in the future there could be the potential for the North to be a cheap labour powerhouse for a reunified nation on the short to medium term it is an economic and social nightmare for SK! I have read one plan where the South after reunification would maintain its defences along the DMZ to stop a flood of NK refuges rampaging into the South totally overwhelming SK infrastructure from housing and feeding them to providing medical care. A more ideal solution for the South is a gradual modernisation and reform of the current NK government towards reunification. With sanctions being slowly lifted and increased trade allowing gentle modernisation until the North is in a position to reunify with the South.
The scenario where the North implodes overthrows the current government and demands immediate reunification is arguably the worse case scenario for the South.
FedaykinStop with the childish name calling.
Substantiate your allegations or admit you have gone off the deep end with no justification.
Now who is having a tantrum.
I started typing a rebuttal but decided it wasn’t worth my time hence the simpler and better for my blood pressure response, I asked you to leave it be but you had to have the last word. You have only yourself to blame. Now do you have anything to add?
You asked for evidence that France is doing a dynamic fleet draw down, I responded with a link in post #41. You then twisted it and said no I had to give evidence of where you had denied that this was happening and accused me of straw manning which is where I got FIVE SHADES OF PISSED OFF (or a tantrum if you want to be childish)! As my original point was purely about differing priorities between France and the Typhoon partners and the lesser need for A/G integration on Typhoon in comparison to France. It is stated policy that France intends to have fleet containing two fast jet types, I conceded that there will be time taken over that but your condescending arguing the toss over a point I wasn’t even arguing is enough to get the response you have got! I asked you to ignore me if you didn’t agree in other words live and let live yet NO you had carry on down the rabbit hole with one condescending smug reply after the next followed by accusations of straw manning which in itself is straw manning! Maybe I should of backed off earlier but being treated like a child by someone who HAS to get the last word is certainly going to get my back up!
Now I will ask politely, I have stated my opinion. It differs from yours, can you have the common decency of leaving it at that! I apologise for causing you a troll BUT if you insist on carrying on intentionally winding me up I will have no choice but to do the thing I asked you of and add to my ignore list.
Good day sir!
FedaykinYou are right there Sens :p the historic section does tend to be “what is this item I have found?”, “I have heard a rumour” or finally “museum x has done this…”
FedaykinJust think that is the better place for it Sens, it is a historic issue as far I see it. No problem with it coming up in debate here but a whole thread to talk about the comparative performance of one type out of service and another nearly gone.
FedaykinBut the F-104 isn’t and he asking for a direct comparison, hence it is more appropriate a question for the historic section.
FedaykinThere is another issue with the Super light fighter that you are merrily inventing here topspeed. You gave a nice long list of potential conflicts where this super cheap fighter would be ideal but fail to notice the elephant in the room: what happens when one side says “hang it all” and buys a more capable fighter!
Have a look at the Eritrean-Etheopian War if you are curious… two third world nations end up fielding the Su-27! Ethiopia a country made famous when an Irishman organised a pop concert to help feed their population in a famine went from operating a light fighter like the F-5 to operating a large twin engine long range air superiority fighter.
Sign In
