Search Results: live nation

Joint-training exercises with allied nations is nothing new to the US military. It reinforces relations between foreign powers and familiarizes them with each other's standard operating procedures in the event of a military conflict.

As one of these important allies, South Korea has trained with the US military for years to stabilize the Korean peninsula in case of a flashpoint crisis. Because North and South Korea are technically still at war, the US's presence is seen by many as a deterrent to a conflict with North Korea.

The two major drills — Foal Eagle and Key Resolve — will include, respectively, 11,500 US troops and 290,000 South Korean troops, and 12,200 US troops and 10,000 South Korean troops.

The drills were originally scheduled for March, it was postponed after North Korea resumed diplomatic relations with South Korea amid the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang.

Unlike previous years where North Korea claimed the drills were a precursor to a military strike, North Korea's response to this year's exercises has been surprisingly muted.

The Pentagon reiterated that the drills had a "defensive nature," and that this year's version would be "at a scale similar to that of the previous years."




Check out the photos of the US and South Korean military in action:

US and South Korean Marines aim their rifles near their amphibious assault vehicles during Foal Eagle, March 30, 2015 Drill.
US Navy sonar technicians from the sonar central room of Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Barry monitor ship bearings for contact during Foal Eagle, March 21, 2017.
Air assets, such as the US Navy's F/A-18 Super Hornet, have also been utilized amid the drills.
US Army CH-47 Chinook and Black Hawk helicopters take part in Foal Eagle at a training field in Pocheon, South Korea, March 25, 2015.
South Korean K1 tanks unleash rounds at the fire training field.
US Army Humvees move out after a live firing drill at the Rodriguez Range in Pocheon, South Korea.

Girls and boys can play youth football no problem especially girls being that they have the size advantage when they're younger but would you let her play in a varsity high school team? Varsity being mostly sophomores juniors and seniors in high school sometimes even freshman (The big ass 9th graders)

Keep in my mind this is varsity HS football which means these kids hit puberty and lets say this isn't a garbage team but more like a team in the highest skilled division which is the 10th best outta the 25 schools in the division. (NOT the 10th best in the nation but in the division for those of you who don't understand)

I just had to ask cause lately some females are expressing their interest in playing football with the boys but the school we go to is a school with a good football program with most players being above 6ft and weighing 170 or more (Excluding the benchwarmers who join the team just to say they play for us). We were honest and told them they won't be able to hang with us and that they need their own girls-only league for fair competition. They insisted they could play with us though.

She'll most likely sit the bench for the most part but if she's a kicker on kickoff or something she has a chance at going up against actual football players who live football. She'll be playing against these players:

Keep in mind
In the pictures they look small but these kids are all above the weight of 180 and 5'10 and up
(Most being 6ft) Below are examples of players she'd definitely be up against:

It just seems to me like though there's some worldly obligation the international community has to impoverished nations, that in the selection process a country makes one would go for entry from nations with higher education & rates of wealth, rather than taking in people who would necessarily need assistance to become trained or skilled enough to contribute to ones economy. I was arguing with my family & they called me a Nazi because I argued we shouldn't just view immigration as a process by which we can rescue people from living in Haiti. Like, Canada's immigration system is very liberal but one needs to have a skillset they can provide to become citizens. You need to have a clear legal record to even visit Canada. But I suspect, if you tried bringing in 50 Haitians flown in from their poorest town to live there, they'd turn them away & that it wouldn't be racially motivated.

I don't know, am I out of line for suggesting this? I disdain Donald Trump but this whole thing sprang from a conversation about him apparently saying he doesn't 'want people coming in from shithole countries', & people are upset because the racial demographics of the people in the countries he listed as 'shitholes' were majority brown. I don't feel like it would necessarily be racially motivated for people to reject say, citizens of Belarus who don't have capital or a skillset from immigrating. I thought this is was a relatively moderate stance on the issue, even if it could be posited that Trump labeled brown majority countries for cynical reasons.