The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone keeps saying North Korea would be a highly dangerous adversary for America to take on in a full blown war, but didn't people say the same about Iraq in 2003 which USA blitzed?

What do North Korea have that Iraq didn't?
 
endless_wheelies said:
Everyone keeps saying North Korea would be a highly dangerous adversary for America to take on in a full blown war, but didn't people say the same about Iraq in 2003 which USA blitzed?

What do North Korea have that Iraq didn't?
Click to expand...
Nukes, chemical weapons, ability to do massive damage with conventional weapons to it's neighbors, borders with it's two biggest allies, 50 plus years of preparing to fight one war, and as far as we know a willing army.

It would be nuts to automatically assume they would be just like Iraq.
 
Drifter said:
Agree .Nothing but posturing. The media loves war though and are salivating at the thought.
Click to expand...
Dr.: We will have to perform surgery to make sure there is no lasting damage. I'm
still confused to how this happened Mr. Williams.
Brian: It was an incident that even the worst amongst us would never wish upon
our mortal enemies. I was presented with a replica of a majestic tomahawk
projectile from an impoverished child. I had it at the bottom of my grand
staircase where it reminded me of that haunting James Blunt song, You're
beautiful. As I was coming down the stairs I heard a pop pop pop, and
thinking the worst I jumped for cover. As I landed I felt an unfamiliar
sensation and fearing the worst I turned my gaze to that eerily empty void
that once displayed said projectile. As I struggled to dial those solemn
numbers that bring dread and hope to anyone in need I thought of all the
poor souls who had to endure a tragedy like this, and they did endure. The
magnificent and brave members of the emergency services rushed me to
triage where humble life savers like yourself are there to treat and heal the
the wounds of misfortune. The condom was only being used as a temporary
dust cover and the popping was my microwave. Thank you fellow citizens
and until tomorrow, goodnight.
 
JustAFan said:
Nukes, chemical weapons, ability to do massive damage with conventional weapons to it's neighbors, borders with it's two biggest allies, 50 plus years of preparing to fight one war, and as far as we know a willing army.

It would be nuts to automatically assume they would be just like Iraq.
Click to expand...
Exactly the same was said about Iraq though, whereas in reality both they and North Korea's weaponry was/is outdated and pretty much obsolete against cutting edge hardware, even their numerous soldiers are badly paid and underfed. South Korea alone would destroy them in all out war.
 
Like I said before, this is all show (although serious show). A WW3 ain't gonna happen, calm down.
 
endless_wheelies said:
Everyone keeps saying North Korea would be a highly dangerous adversary for America to take on in a full blown war, but didn't people say the same about Iraq in 2003 which USA blitzed?

What do North Korea have that Iraq didn't?
Click to expand...

NK pose little or no threat directly to the US. The problem is that they have thousands of dug in artillery pieces within range of Seoul. At a single order from their leaders, they could absolutely devastate South Korea's capital causing thousands or tens of thousands of deaths and incalculable damage, and there isn't a single thing we can do to stop them.

NK also have the of the largest armies on the planet, and millions of heavily propagandized reservists. A lot would doubtless surrender and be glad of their freedom if the leadership were removed, but when people have spent their entire lives being brainwashed like that, you have to expect that a large number would continue to resist.

Basically it's a recipe for a massive bloodbath even without taking into account the chemical weapons and nukes, which is why it hasn't been resolved in the past.

Oh and last time China sacrificed a million Chinese lives to intervene against America at a time when America had nukes and China didn't. Now they're basically a superpower and fiercely nationalistic. Attacking a neighbor who they consider an ally (although a deeply annoying one) would be a direct challenge to their sphere of influence. It would also have an effect on their saber rattling over the South China Sea. If they caved in on NK and let the US do what they wanted, then it would be much harder to be taken seriously over their own territorial claims.

So yeah, it's one of those situations where even a limited attack could lead to horrific consequences that include a nuclear war.
 
I better put some hours in Fallout. I need to master life in the wastelands.
 
Kentonio said:
Bollocks to that, I'm expecting France to sit this one out, so we can drink wine and watch the mushroom clouds from a safe distance!
Click to expand...

Would be nice that for once France and Belgium aren't invaded in a WW :lol: Let's share the wine and beer and enjoy the show.
 
Kentonio said:
NK pose little or no threat directly to the US. The problem is that they have thousands of dug in artillery pieces within range of Seoul. At a single order from their leaders, they could absolutely devastate South Korea's capital causing thousands or tens of thousands of deaths and incalculable damage, and there isn't a single thing we can do to stop them.

NK also have the of the largest armies on the planet, and millions of heavily propagandized reservists. A lot would doubtless surrender and be glad of their freedom if the leadership were removed, but when people have spent their entire lives being brainwashed like that, you have to expect that a large number would continue to resist.

Basically it's a recipe for a massive bloodbath even without taking into account the chemical weapons and nukes, which is why it hasn't been resolved in the past.

Oh and last time China sacrificed a million Chinese lives to intervene against America at a time when America had nukes and China didn't. Now they're basically a superpower and fiercely nationalistic. Attacking a neighbor who they consider an ally (although a deeply annoying one) would be a direct challenge to their sphere of influence. It would also have an effect on their saber rattling over the South China Sea. If they caved in on NK and let the US do what they wanted, then it would be much harder to be taken seriously over their own territorial claims.

So yeah, it's one of those situations where even a limited attack could lead to horrific consequences that include a nuclear war.
Click to expand...
But the USSR already had them, and that's why we still have two Koreas today.
 
The Firestarter said:
But the USSR already had them, and that's why we still have two Koreas today.
Click to expand...

It was probably too early for a Russian nuclear retaliation. The first successful ICBM test wasn't until 57, 4 years after the Korean War finished. The Russians didn't even have the capacity for a normal nuclear air drop until 51. The US came very close to using them, but it's still up for debate why they eventually didn't.
 
I think i would prefer to be living under a strict regime than being bombed. The revolution has to come from inside North Korea.
 
Kentonio said:
It was probably too early for a Russian nuclear retaliation. The first successful ICBM test wasn't until 57, 4 years after the Korean War finished. The Russians didn't even have the capacity for a normal nuclear air drop until 51. The US came very close to using them, but it's still up for debate why they eventually didn't.
Click to expand...
I was
Kentonio said:
It was probably too early for a Russian nuclear retaliation. The first successful ICBM test wasn't until 57, 4 years after the Korean War finished. The Russians didn't even have the capacity for a normal nuclear air drop until 51. The US came very close to using them, but it's still up for debate why they eventually didn't.
Click to expand...
I presume the exact Soviet capabilities have not been entirely known then, and it was deemed risky. That being said, Truman had given c&c to the field , and B-29s were on alert in Japan, so it was close indeed.
 
The Firestarter said:
I presume the exact Soviet capabilities have not been entirely known then, and it was deemed risky. That being said, Truman had given c&c to the field , and B-29s were on alert in Japan, so it was close indeed.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's a weird one. It's probably the last time they could have actually have gotten away with it without triggering mass nuclear war, so thank god they didn't.
 
Kentonio said:
NK also have the of the largest armies on the planet, and millions of heavily propagandized reservists. A lot would doubtless surrender and be glad of their freedom if the leadership were removed, but when people have spent their entire lives being brainwashed like that, you have to expect that a large number would continue to resist.
Click to expand...

This part makes me think of Japanese troops (and indeed civilians) during WWII, the way they fought and indeed would die rather than face capture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Cliff
 
Kentonio said:
Yeah it's a weird one. It's probably the last time they could have actually have gotten away with it without triggering mass nuclear war, so thank god they didn't.
Click to expand...
Agree. Also the extent of the long term devastation resulting in such action had not been fully researched or publicly accepted.
 
Kentonio said:
NK pose little or no threat directly to the US. The problem is that they have thousands of dug in artillery pieces within range of Seoul. At a single order from their leaders, they could absolutely devastate South Korea's capital causing thousands or tens of thousands of deaths and incalculable damage, and there isn't a single thing we can do to stop them.

NK also have the of the largest armies on the planet, and millions of heavily propagandized reservists. A lot would doubtless surrender and be glad of their freedom if the leadership were removed, but when people have spent their entire lives being brainwashed like that, you have to expect that a large number would continue to resist.

Basically it's a recipe for a massive bloodbath even without taking into account the chemical weapons and nukes, which is why it hasn't been resolved in the past.

Oh and last time China sacrificed a million Chinese lives to intervene against America at a time when America had nukes and China didn't. Now they're basically a superpower and fiercely nationalistic. Attacking a neighbor who they consider an ally (although a deeply annoying one) would be a direct challenge to their sphere of influence. It would also have an effect on their saber rattling over the South China Sea. If they caved in on NK and let the US do what they wanted, then it would be much harder to be taken seriously over their own territorial claims.

So yeah, it's one of those situations where even a limited attack could lead to horrific consequences that include a nuclear war.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I really cannot see how a war against N. Korea could go well for US and co. Unless, US decides to throw a few nukes immediately and basically wipe out the entire leadership of N. Korea, N. Korea will hit Seoul hard. In any scenario, I think that the best you can hope is tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands victims in S. Korea and millions in N. Korea.

And this is without considering China, who in any circumstance wouldn't allow US to send troops here.

If there will be war, I hope that US and China talk before that, and make a deal that after the war, only China will have the right of keeping any military presence in N. Korea, while guaranteeing that all members of UN will take some part on rebuilding N. Korea and providing humanitarian aid. But US must make it clear that they have no intentions on sending their troops there, otherwise that could really launch a new world war.
 
Fergies Gum said:
Chinese goverment and American intel sources denied the reports of the 150k troops a few days ago and said they were fake.
Click to expand...
Hadn't heard that before. Was pretty hard to find as well, but yes, at least the Chinese denied.
But anyway, this is something both sides would obviously deny. Doesn't mean anything.
Even without those 150k, there's a ton of troops at that border anyway.
 
fcbforever said:
Hadn't heard that before. Was pretty hard to find as well, but yes, at least the Chinese denied.
But anyway, this is something both sides would obviously deny. Doesn't mean anything.
Even without those 150k, there's a ton of troops at that border anyway.
Click to expand...

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/are-chinese-troops-massing-north-korean-border-no-n745611

Also the guy who posted that tweet with the video is lying and deceiving people.

This exact footage was originally uploaded on 16 March. China had sent 3000 troops a month ago and this video was part of that story.

http://china.hket.com/article/1710749/

This is the original video

 
Trump to discontinue Obama policy of voluntarily releasing White House visitor logs
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...luntarily-releasing-white-house-visitor-logs/

One of the most ridiculous things released by this administration:
Since Trump took office in January, the page where the visitor logs had been publicly available has gone dark, and Trump administration officials said Friday that they will no longer maintain it, a move that the White House said would save taxpayers $70,000 by 2020.
Click to expand...
 
Fergies Gum said:
http://www.nbcnews.com/card/are-chinese-troops-massing-north-korean-border-no-n745611

Also the guy who posted that tweet with the video is lying and deceiving people.

This exact footage was originally uploaded on 16 March. China had sent 3000 troops a month ago and this video was part of that story.

http://china.hket.com/article/1710749/

This is the original video

Click to expand...


Maybe I googled wrong then, it would only give me some Iranish news site :D
Anyway, as its stated there, there's 250k troops anyway. And their state of alert is way more interesting than their number.
 
fcbforever said:
Maybe I googled wrong then, it would only give me some Iranish news site :D
Anyway, as its stated there, there's 250k troops anyway. And their state of alert is way more interesting than their number.
Click to expand...

Yep, there's always a lot of troops in the region, but its annoying seeing people like the twitter user above try to deceive people and to make people alarmed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.