Comments for the corioblog http://www.coriolinus.net read, and be entertained Sun, 12 Sep 2010 18:15:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= Comment on Airplane vs. Treadmill by Paul Goodspeed http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/08/27/airplane-vs-treadmill/#comment-41430 Paul Goodspeed Sun, 12 Sep 2010 18:15:26 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3118#comment-41430 "Idiotiefreude." “Idiotiefreude.”

]]>
Comment on Ground Zero Mosque by Rourke http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/08/17/ground-zero-mosque/#comment-41280 Rourke Fri, 27 Aug 2010 01:41:44 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3115#comment-41280 <i>The people who really get my goat in this parade of idiots are the ones who fill themselves with mock outrage in order to score political points. Because of them, this is somehow a big deal. Because of them, we’re driving away the moderate Muslims, and encouraging the extremists.</i> Yes. I completely agree. I actually have a lot more to add -- but like you I'm sickened, I'm annoyed, the whole Republican opposition to it reeks of blatant xenophobia and short-sighted politicking. The people who really get my goat in this parade of idiots are the ones who fill themselves with mock outrage in order to score political points. Because of them, this is somehow a big deal. Because of them, we’re driving away the moderate Muslims, and encouraging the extremists.

Yes. I completely agree. I actually have a lot more to add — but like you I’m sickened, I’m annoyed, the whole Republican opposition to it reeks of blatant xenophobia and short-sighted politicking.

]]>
Comment on What to do about the North by coriolinus http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/14/what-to-do-about-the-north/#comment-40799 coriolinus Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:58:55 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3082#comment-40799 The alternative to war is to let the Kim dynasty continue to do whatever the hell they want to their own people and to the South. As for as the large military and militarized population, I'd say that actually works against them: a people with a military tradition, as opposed to one with an insurgent tradition, can actually be defeated by another military. You're right about the costs: they'd be enormous. A war here wouldn't advance the interests of either the US or me personally. That doesn't mean that the wars would be unjust. The ROK has plenty of plans for what to do about the fall of the DPRK, no matter when or how it is accomplished. The bigger issue is that no amount of planning is going to make the integration easy. The alternative to war is to let the Kim dynasty continue to do whatever the hell they want to their own people and to the South. As for as the large military and militarized population, I’d say that actually works against them: a people with a military tradition, as opposed to one with an insurgent tradition, can actually be defeated by another military.

You’re right about the costs: they’d be enormous. A war here wouldn’t advance the interests of either the US or me personally. That doesn’t mean that the wars would be unjust.

The ROK has plenty of plans for what to do about the fall of the DPRK, no matter when or how it is accomplished. The bigger issue is that no amount of planning is going to make the integration easy.

]]>
Comment on What to do about the North by Rourke http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/14/what-to-do-about-the-north/#comment-40795 Rourke Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:06:38 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3082#comment-40795 I'll try to read both books ASAP. You wrote: <i>Still, that’s where he and I amicably disagree: while it makes sense for him to avoid fighting that would inevitably kill millions of his voters, I think it’d be better in the long run for the world at large and Korea in particular if we could incite the North into starting a war which ended in its destruction.</i> A highly controversial assertion. Personally, I'd say another war with the North would be too costly in terms of blood and treasure for the North, ROK, and (if we get involved) the US. I get that you're saying "in the long run," but nevertheless, I'd say it's better to overestimate than underestimate the costs of war, especially a state-to-state war with the DPRK. Even though the DPRK is poor, it's got one of the largest armies in the world plus a highly militarized civilian population -- if we do eventually fight Korean War II, it would probably be long and costly. As for state policy, both ROK and China are extremely concerned about the prospect of unification largely because of the North's population -- unlike the situation with East/West German reunification, it would be extremely difficult for ROK to absorb the North's huge, starving, extremely uneducated population. Unfortunately, based on a few articles I've read, it seems ROK doesn't have a well-drawn-out plan for the question "What happens if the North falls?" I’ll try to read both books ASAP.

You wrote: Still, that’s where he and I amicably disagree: while it makes sense for him to avoid fighting that would inevitably kill millions of his voters, I think it’d be better in the long run for the world at large and Korea in particular if we could incite the North into starting a war which ended in its destruction.

A highly controversial assertion. Personally, I’d say another war with the North would be too costly in terms of blood and treasure for the North, ROK, and (if we get involved) the US. I get that you’re saying “in the long run,” but nevertheless, I’d say it’s better to overestimate than underestimate the costs of war, especially a state-to-state war with the DPRK. Even though the DPRK is poor, it’s got one of the largest armies in the world plus a highly militarized civilian population — if we do eventually fight Korean War II, it would probably be long and costly.

As for state policy, both ROK and China are extremely concerned about the prospect of unification largely because of the North’s population — unlike the situation with East/West German reunification, it would be extremely difficult for ROK to absorb the North’s huge, starving, extremely uneducated population. Unfortunately, based on a few articles I’ve read, it seems ROK doesn’t have a well-drawn-out plan for the question “What happens if the North falls?”

]]>
Comment on The Myth of Sisyphus by Rourke http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/17/the-myth-of-sisyphus/#comment-40794 Rourke Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:58:53 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3087#comment-40794 I've found the same is true for pretty much every philosophical text (that I've read, that is, and most philosophical texts I've read have been excerpts.) Or, to phrase it simplistically, "Philosophers can't write." I’ve found the same is true for pretty much every philosophical text (that I’ve read, that is, and most philosophical texts I’ve read have been excerpts.) Or, to phrase it simplistically, “Philosophers can’t write.”

]]>
Comment on What to do about the North by coriolinus http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/14/what-to-do-about-the-north/#comment-40749 coriolinus Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:14:03 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3082#comment-40749 1. Most recently, The Cleanest Race by B.R.Myers. That's the book that inspired this post. Before that, Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader by Bradley K. Martin, and any news I can find on the place. It's been a topic of interest. 2. See 1. 3. I don't have a proper answer to that question; I haven't really evaluated his policies. You're spot on as to the reason: they only affect me if he manages to start a war, and he's got tremendous incentive to avoid one. So far, he's succeeded. Still, that's where he and I amicably disagree: while it makes sense for him to avoid fighting that would inevitably kill millions of his voters, I think it'd be better in the long run for the world at large and Korea in particular if we could incite the North into starting a war which ended in its destruction. 1. Most recently, The Cleanest Race by B.R.Myers. That’s the book that inspired this post. Before that, Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader by Bradley K. Martin, and any news I can find on the place. It’s been a topic of interest.

2. See 1.

3. I don’t have a proper answer to that question; I haven’t really evaluated his policies. You’re spot on as to the reason: they only affect me if he manages to start a war, and he’s got tremendous incentive to avoid one. So far, he’s succeeded. Still, that’s where he and I amicably disagree: while it makes sense for him to avoid fighting that would inevitably kill millions of his voters, I think it’d be better in the long run for the world at large and Korea in particular if we could incite the North into starting a war which ended in its destruction.

]]>
Comment on What to do about the North by Rourke http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/14/what-to-do-about-the-north/#comment-40725 Rourke Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:06:10 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3082#comment-40725 <strike>Two></strike> Three questions: 1. What books have you read? I'd probably also like to read them. 2. Have you read any new/recent books on NK, especially <i>The Cleanest Race: How North Koreans See Themselves and Why It Matters</i>, by B. R. Myers? As for diplomacy: In general I'm a huge fan of diplomacy. But NK, I would assert -- in addition to being the most totalitarian place on earth -- is also the <i>least diplomatic</i> nation in the world (less than Burma, Sudan, or Iran). Given this, I'm inclined to agree with your realistic assessment of the situation on the Peninsula. 3. Do you think Pres. Lee Myung-bak's policies are handling the situation properly? I presume you'd be more directly affected by the decisions of USFK and DOD, not ROK and State, but nevertheless -- do you think your hosts are handling it properly? Two> Three questions:

1. What books have you read? I’d probably also like to read them.
2. Have you read any new/recent books on NK, especially The Cleanest Race: How North Koreans See Themselves and Why It Matters, by B. R. Myers?

As for diplomacy: In general I’m a huge fan of diplomacy. But NK, I would assert — in addition to being the most totalitarian place on earth — is also the least diplomatic nation in the world (less than Burma, Sudan, or Iran). Given this, I’m inclined to agree with your realistic assessment of the situation on the Peninsula.

3. Do you think Pres. Lee Myung-bak’s policies are handling the situation properly? I presume you’d be more directly affected by the decisions of USFK and DOD, not ROK and State, but nevertheless — do you think your hosts are handling it properly?

]]>
Comment on Cyrano de Bergerac by Dad http://www.coriolinus.net/2010/06/10/cyrano-de-bergerac/#comment-40700 Dad Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:06:35 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=3079#comment-40700 Heh, taking it seriously is not what it's about. I'm so glad you enjoyed it! Heh, taking it seriously is not what it’s about. I’m so glad you enjoyed it!

]]>
Comment on in which I fail to achieve depression by coriolinus http://www.coriolinus.net/2003/11/23/in-which-i-fail-to-achieve-depression/#comment-40486 coriolinus Sat, 22 May 2010 23:04:29 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/2003/11/23/407/#comment-40486 I have no idea. I'm living proof that leaving ROTC for an even more prejudicial reason is no bar from a career as a military officer. However, I did switch branches: I was told quite clearly that if I tried to get back into the AF, I'd have a tough time getting in at all, let alone making a career of it. I think the people to ask would be the AFROTC cadre. I have no idea. I’m living proof that leaving ROTC for an even more prejudicial reason is no bar from a career as a military officer. However, I did switch branches: I was told quite clearly that if I tried to get back into the AF, I’d have a tough time getting in at all, let alone making a career of it. I think the people to ask would be the AFROTC cadre.

]]>
Comment on Exophoria by coriolinus http://www.coriolinus.net/2009/01/21/exophoria/#comment-40485 coriolinus Sat, 22 May 2010 22:58:55 +0000 http://www.coriolinus.net/?p=2740#comment-40485 I can't say how the Navy'll treat this, but for me once I saw the Flight Surgeon two weeks later she said it was fine, and I didn't want to pry too deeply in case she was wrong and it wasn't. It didn't come up at all on this year's exam, so I'm guessing that it was if anything a temporary phenomenon. Good luck getting approved! You've got a lot more flight experience than me, so you should be even more likely to get waivered, but all I can really do is sympathize with your experience right now. I can’t say how the Navy’ll treat this, but for me once I saw the Flight Surgeon two weeks later she said it was fine, and I didn’t want to pry too deeply in case she was wrong and it wasn’t. It didn’t come up at all on this year’s exam, so I’m guessing that it was if anything a temporary phenomenon.

Good luck getting approved! You’ve got a lot more flight experience than me, so you should be even more likely to get waivered, but all I can really do is sympathize with your experience right now.

]]>