If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Hindustan Times)   Kim Jong-Un: A mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a windtalker wrapped in Scooby-Doo episode wrapped in bacon   (hindustantimes.com) divider line 53
    More: Interesting, Scooby Doo, bacon  
•       •       •

7634 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2013 at 8:50 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-05 10:03:58 AM
3 votes:

Fireproof: Anyone asking about the size of the NK military needs to RTFA:


That graphic is VERY misleading. There's simply NO comparison between the 4,100 tanks the North supposedly has versus the 2,400 the South has. They would likely not face each other because the North doesn't have fuel to run them and if they did, American/Korean airpower would destroy them.

The idea that the North Koreans have more "combat aircraft" than the South is laughable if technically true. The North's most numerous fighter is the MiG-21 and they still have MiG-17's in the inventory. The South and the Americans have F-16's, F-15's, and F-22's which would decimate any force the North could even get off the ground.
2013-04-05 09:36:40 AM
3 votes:

KarmicDisaster: This armchair general says:
During the first 24 hrs, we would destroy their C&C, their air force, their power "grid", such as it is, any air defenses, and any fixed artillery positions in range of SK. Then with complete air superiority it would be a longer matter of just waiting for any vehicle or troops to move on a road and hitting that, maybe with hitting some fixed positions as they are discovered.  The hunkered down troops would have no way to resupply and no orders and no way to move; I'd just wait them out; they will make a mistake. This phase might take months, but why attack fixed positions, let nature take it's course.


This is all dependent on whether China intervenes (as required by their treaty). Unlike last time, China might not want to piss off their #1 debtor, who could use a war powers act to render all their debts to China null and void.
2013-04-05 08:58:59 AM
3 votes:

nekom: I really hope kim dong fatty goes too far this time.  No people should have to live like that.


Its looking like hes going to.

Maybe its the only way North Korea is going to get better, and the govt knows it. They cant just give up communism cold turkey, or simply hand the country over to the south...so they go out in a blaze of glory. The last bastion of hardline communism falls, and in the long run the people end up better off.
2013-04-05 10:47:37 AM
2 votes:

HMS_Blinkin: WRT their artillery, a lot of their positions are fixed, and are in fact viewable on Google Earth (so you know the US military knows where they are too). I don't expect that those fixed positions would last very long either---it's just a matter of us not running out of ammo to shoot at them, but between attack planes/helos, drones, cruise missiles, etc., I imagine we could silence most of their artillery reasonably fast.


We would be very unlikely to destroy enough of that artillery fast enough to keep them from devastating Seoul and anything else close to the border.  Many of those fixed positions are in reinforced concrete revetments.  Counter battery may have to hit them a dozen times to knock them out.  Aircraft may be required to destroy many of them.

Not a problem when dealing with a few hundred, but we're talking tens of thousands.  Some estimates put the total at 50,000, with 5,000 hardened tubes within range of Seoul.  Even if you can take out the '1% per hour' that is claimed by the South Korean military, that still results in the total destruction of Seoul.

Just consider the 5,000 Artillery tubes pointed at Seoul.  Firing just 4 times per minute (a low figure), that puts 20,000 explosions into a city of 10 1/2 million within the FIRST MINUTE.   Within the first hour, 1.2 million HE and incendiary shells go into that thriving metropolis.  Yes, there will be a high dud and miss rate, but even if the duds and misses comprise 90% of the shells, Seoul will still be farked.

That's the reason we haven't knocked these idiot's blocks off already.  Because the south put their capital in the wrong damn place.
2013-04-05 10:30:22 AM
2 votes:

SurelyShirley:
So if the Chinese would take out the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial, you would wake up and surrender to Communism?
If that's how it works, why didn't we just send a squadron of bombers to Berlin in December of '41, take out the Reichstag and Brandenburg Gate, and the war would have been over by Christmas.


There's a big difference there. Neither the Washington monument nor the Lincoln memorial mean anything to me other than being a part of the history of the nation I happened to get born in. I don't see huge photos of Obama all over the place, nor do I recall seeing any of Bush, Clinton, other Bush, Reagan or Carter in my lifetime (though to be fair, I was only an infant, perhaps I didn't notice the giant Carter photos everywhere). There is no cult of personality here. Sure there are those who believe that the USA is god's gift to the world, and while misguided they are under no pressure to believe that. On the contrary, comedians openly make fun of Obama, as they have done for every POTUS ever.

The entire CULTURE of DPRK, which seems to be solely based on a cult of personality, has got to go.
2013-04-05 10:29:30 AM
2 votes:
The most numerous transport aircraft in the North Korean inventory. They have 300 of these. And they have been completely grounded at various times because they don't have the fuel to fly them.upload.wikimedia.org
2013-04-05 10:27:43 AM
2 votes:
The Nork military spends most of its time harvesting crops and working in factories, not training to fight. They are so short of food that they have sometimes been ordered to go back to their barracks and sleep more so they aren't as hungry. They have a lot of artillery and could do some damage to Seoul before being destroyed, the variable there is how much of their ammunition is dud, whether the crews are trained or fit enough to service the weapon, and if the pieces themselves are actually functional. There is some question as to if the Norks even HAVE a nuke, much less have figured out how to put it on a missile and they certainly have not tested a functional ballistic nuke - as any engineer knows without testing you don't find all the engineering bugs.

Comparing the Nork military to the South Korea's is a laugh. The South Koreans are making plans to occupy and bring food to the starving population, not worrying too much about actually defeating the Norks because that is a given. The question is whether the Chinese invade to prevent a united free Korea on its border.
2013-04-05 09:36:43 AM
2 votes:

HMS_Blinkin:
Probably the safest course of action for SK and US military as well as SK civilians.  I would add to that though, that we'd want to get all of our assets focused on capturing and/or killing the various generals, Communist party leaders, and Kim himself.  NK's whole "pyramid scheme" is kind of held together by threats and power at the top, so decapitating the regime may facilitate things.


I'd even go one further, take out the mausoleum of kim il sung, Juche tower, everything like that. Make sure they know that the lie is now finished, time to wake the fark up. That shock isn't going to feel good for many of them, but it's best to get it out of the way early on, make sure they know that the jig is up for good.
2013-04-05 09:35:22 AM
2 votes:

TXEric: GoodOmens: somedude210: Best Korea has told Russia they might want to evacuate their embassy staff. It's in their Best interests, really

Same to the British Embassy.  Saying the "North Korean government would be unable to guarantee the safety of embassies and international organizations in the country in the event of conflict from April 10. "

April 10?  So, are they telegraphing an official start of hostilities?
Sounds counter productive.


If I were a betting man I would say they are going to do a missile test on April 9th.
2013-04-05 09:27:14 AM
2 votes:
This armchair general says:
During the first 24 hrs, we would destroy their C&C, their air force, their power "grid", such as it is, any air defenses, and any fixed artillery positions in range of SK. Then with complete air superiority it would be a longer matter of just waiting for any vehicle or troops to move on a road and hitting that, maybe with hitting some fixed positions as they are discovered.  The hunkered down troops would have no way to resupply and no orders and no way to move; I'd just wait them out; they will make a mistake. This phase might take months, but why attack fixed positions, let nature take it's course.
2013-04-05 09:26:06 AM
2 votes:

GoodOmens: somedude210: Best Korea has told Russia they might want to evacuate their embassy staff. It's in their Best interests, really

Same to the British Embassy.  Saying the "North Korean government would be unable to guarantee the safety of embassies and international organizations in the country in the event of conflict from April 10. "


April 10?  So, are they telegraphing an official start of hostilities?
Sounds counter productive.
2013-04-05 09:23:33 AM
2 votes:
Has anyone bothered to interview his former schoolmates from that private school he attended?
2013-04-05 12:58:40 PM
1 votes:

dukeblue219: Fireproof: Anyone asking about the size of the NK military needs to RTFA:

That graphic is VERY misleading. There's simply NO comparison between the 4,100 tanks the North supposedly has versus the 2,400 the South has. They would likely not face each other because the North doesn't have fuel to run them and if they did, American/Korean airpower would destroy them.

The idea that the North Koreans have more "combat aircraft" than the South is laughable if technically true. The North's most numerous fighter is the MiG-21 and they still have MiG-17's in the inventory. The South and the Americans have F-16's, F-15's, and F-22's which would decimate any force the North could even get off the ground.


And the large majority of their 1.2 million active troops are starving, sickly, weak, and untrained in anything but marching up and down the square.
2013-04-05 12:57:43 PM
1 votes:

Aar1012: I'm glad that no one here is a General in the army. We'd be screwed since any planning would turn into a pointless debate about some mundane word.


You don't understand the complexities of international relations. I NUKE YOU NOW!!! SOON I NUKE YOU!!! OHH YOU SOOOO SCARRRED! YOU GIVE ME GRAIN , I NUKE YOU LATER!!! YOU SHAKING IN YOUR BOOTS OOOOOOHH YOU AFRAID KOREA NUKE. YOU NOT NEED ADMIT. I KNOW YOU AFRAID!!! BEST KOREA SHOW YOU MERCY THIS TIME!
2013-04-05 12:44:56 PM
1 votes:

nekom: stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)

Little over a million troops, but old Soviet and Chinese equipment. Major fuel issues. They do, however, have a lot of artillery that could be pointed at Seoul. They absolutely can't win, and I'm inclined to believe U.S. intelligence estimates that their capacity to make war could be destroyed in mere hours, but it may not be pretty. And what happens to the ensuing power vacuum, that remains a big unknown. The U.S. will not occupy best Korea, we'll just knock their military down. I suppose worst Korea comes in then? Or China. Who knows.


terrain and weather is a much bigger factor in Korea Vs. the sandbox.  Any invasion might do well to circumvent the parts of the DMZ that are littered with landmines.  That said it's a big army but not well equipped or battle tested.  I get the feeling that the troops and command have a kind of Internet Tough Guy false sense of ability.
2013-04-05 11:56:55 AM
1 votes:

HMS_Blinkin: That's actually a pretty common misconception. The vast majority of NK guns can't actually reach quite that far, and most of the artillery positions on the NK side of the DMZ are either out of range or too small for the big guns that are needed to hit Seoul.


That writeup talks of hits to "central Seoul".  Seoul is a big damn city, over 200 square miles.  The northern part of the city is well within range of much lesser guns.

Fire spreads. Incendiaries may be enough to burn down much of Seoul, depending on environmental conditions, and don't discount WMD.  If the NK military leadership truly know the score, they'll know they're definitely going to lose.  It will just be a matter of how much damage they can inflict on the way out.  Most nations would never dare use bio, chem or nuke weapons, most nations aren't North Korea.  Even shells filled with inert radiological material could deny access to large sections of Seoul, for years.

At a minimum, the northern portion of Seoul would probably look like Stalingrad within the first few hours of fighting.  Depending on environmental factors and whether the north used WMD's, it is well within the realm of possibility that the majority of Seoul could be made unlivable.

The South doesn't want that to happen to their capital city. Who would?  That's largely why North Korea still exists.
2013-04-05 11:17:15 AM
1 votes:

ransack.: Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: ooh! India?

India

Per Global Security:

1 China 1,600,000
2 South Korea 1,240,000
3 United States 1,125,000
4 India 1,120,000
5 North Korea 1,000,000
6 Israel 633,000
7 Pakistan 550,000
8 Russia 415,000
9 Vietnam 410,000
10 Turkey 400,000

wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.

Nah, we don't need as many troops since we've got the biggest bombs and awesome war machines.  An invasion of North Korea might require a draft.

Drafts are illegal now. -2/10


Active soldiers? That has not mattered since WWII. Missiles, Air strikes, naval artillery barrages and just good old automatic weapons make 'troops' pretty much inconsequential. Like grass to a lawn mower.
2013-04-05 11:08:55 AM
1 votes:

Deep Contact: He likes amusement parks and Disney characters. It's like dealing with Michael Jackson.


Depends on the Disney Character.

media.aintitcool.com
2013-04-05 11:08:48 AM
1 votes:
I don't mind us posturing a little bit, but, when the day is done, doing nothing seems reasonable.
2013-04-05 11:01:55 AM
1 votes:

metallion: Best thing to do is air-drop food as far away from the leadership as possible.  Let the soldiers and the small villages be the ones who get fark-tons of food from the US and allies...

Make it interesting.  Spike it with viagra.

That would keep them occupied for a while.  Hopefully not over 4 hours at a stretch.. :)


Then the regime says, anyone seen eating the food will be sent to re-education camps, along with their entire families.
2013-04-05 10:59:34 AM
1 votes:

RandomRandom: HMS_Blinkin:

That's the reason we haven't knocked these idiot's blocks off already.  Because the south put their capital in the wrong damn place.


THIS. We should have never allowed the 59th Parallel (or whatever damn Parallel it is)  to be the final Border. Should have pushed inland 50 Miles further before we signed the armistice in '53.

Of course, its easy to say that looking back 60 years....who knew at the time?
2013-04-05 10:58:36 AM
1 votes:

ransack.: Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: ooh! India?

India

Per Global Security:

1 China 1,600,000
2 South Korea 1,240,000
3 United States 1,125,000
4 India 1,120,000
5 North Korea 1,000,000
6 Israel 633,000
7 Pakistan 550,000
8 Russia 415,000
9 Vietnam 410,000
10 Turkey 400,000

wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.

Nah, we don't need as many troops since we've got the biggest bombs and awesome war machines.  An invasion of North Korea might require a draft.

Drafts are illegal now. -2/10


what do you mean, illegal?
Are you saying if we instituted one, it would be against our laws?
2013-04-05 10:57:58 AM
1 votes:

RandomRandom: We would be very unlikely to destroy enough of that artillery fast enough to keep them from devastating Seoul and anything else close to the border.  Many of those fixed positions are in reinforced concrete revetments.  Counter battery may have to hit them a dozen times to knock them out.  Aircraft may be required to destroy many of them.

Not a problem when dealing with a few hundred, but we're talking tens of thousands.  Some estimates put the total at 50,000, with 5,000 hardened tubes within range of Seoul.  Even if you can take out the '1% per hour' that is claimed by the South Korean military, that still results in the total destruction of Seoul.

Just consider the 5,000 Artillery tubes pointed at Seoul.  Firing just 4 times per minute (a low figure), that puts 20,000 explosions into a city of 10 1/2 million within the FIRST MINUTE.   Within the first hour, 1.2 million HE and incendiary shells go into that thriving metropolis.  Yes, there will be a high dud and miss rate, but even if the duds and misses comprise 90% of the shells, Seoul will still be farked.

That's the reason we haven't knocked these idiot's blocks off already.  Because the south put their capital in the wrong damn place.


That's actually a pretty common misconception.  The vast majority of NK guns can't actually reach quite that far, and most of the artillery positions on the NK side of the DMZ are either out of range or too small for the big guns that are needed to hit Seoul.

Google "Bluffer's Guide North Korea Strikes," it's a fascinating rundown of NK positions based on Google Earth image analysis.  I'll quote a relevant part though:

"Contrary to popular belief, these [170 mm Koksan guns] are the only North Korean artillery guns (or MRLS for that matter!) which can reach central Seoul from behind the North Korean Border. Although the system is likely to be employed in a regular mobile artillery manner, they would be rather exposed if deployed sufficiently close to the border to make such a bombardment. There are only 17 HARTS (hardened Artillery Sites, see later) within 55km of central Seoul. "

So, the US just has to focus on a relatively manageable number of artillery locations to protect Seoul.  The rest will take longer to be dealt with, obviously, but are not in such a position to do as much damage.
2013-04-05 10:55:20 AM
1 votes:

Carn: Uchiha_Cycliste: The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: ooh! India?

India

Per Global Security:

1 China 1,600,000
2 South Korea 1,240,000
3 United States 1,125,000
4 India 1,120,000
5 North Korea 1,000,000
6 Israel 633,000
7 Pakistan 550,000
8 Russia 415,000
9 Vietnam 410,000
10 Turkey 400,000

wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.

Nah, we don't need as many troops since we've got the biggest bombs and awesome war machines.  An invasion of North Korea might require a draft.


Drafts are illegal now. -2/10
2013-04-05 10:46:52 AM
1 votes:

orclover: I'm no expert but...: orclover: FTFY, Dont use that word except for its intended purpose. If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.

Is that some sort of pet peeve????

Yea it is and its pointless.  As has been proven above the english language has been shiat on so much that original definitions are long forgotten.  But nobody really gives a fark right?


Ok, decimate/decimation as in the Roman was a military punishment where 1 in 10 soldiers was killed by colleagues and a quick look at the OED shows that decimatation was a tithe during Cromwells era but apart from that decimate/decimation has for 200 years plus meant to destroy or kill a large proportion of something. I'm just wondering what your peeve is then?
2013-04-05 10:45:38 AM
1 votes:
It may even be that NK feels like there is nothing to lose by going into full war-mode...  Do nothing and the people are dying of starvation and malnutrition.  Go to war, and at least they have the illusion of being occupied for the good of the country.

It's more likely to happen than we would like to believe.

Stupid gets trumped by desperation.
2013-04-05 10:43:31 AM
1 votes:
That article was strangely informative.  You typically don't see anything that calm in American journ-

hindustantimes.com

-ah.
2013-04-05 10:40:50 AM
1 votes:
He's a spoiled, crazy, chubby, stupid, harmless, boring little egomaniac who is being used as a paper tiger by news magazines, websites and governments to get attention and scare people. There, now you don't have to RTFA.
2013-04-05 10:39:00 AM
1 votes:

TV's Vinnie: Has anyone bothered to interview his former schoolmates from that private school he attended?


I did. Oddly enough he didn't mention who he was at school, so no one knew who he was while he was there.

The interviews went something like this:

Some dude: "What, that fat kid? Head of North Korea? I remember taking a huge dump once. He came in and complained about the smell. I turned him upside down and gave him a swirly before I flushed."

Some chick: "I lost a bet once and had to get him to take his pants off in front of me. For a second there, I thought he was a fat lesbian chick. Seriously... I couldn't find his dick. Then my sorority sisters came in and we all laughed and pointed at his tiny manhood. What is he up to these days?"

Some teacher: "If there was even one kid I thought I'd gotten through to, it was him. I showed him hours and hours of pictures from the Holocaust, videos of KKK members committing atrocities, videos of voter suppression  and videos of media suppression. I think he finally got it. Anyway, what's he up to these days?"
2013-04-05 10:37:18 AM
1 votes:

Uchiha_Cycliste: wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.


Anybody can arm a million soldiers with rifles and say they have the world's biggest army. That says nothing about the relative strengths of each army.
2013-04-05 10:36:26 AM
1 votes:

Uchiha_Cycliste: wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.


These numbers are all counting reserves, and this is just personnel (doesn't count hardware, tech, logistics, etc).

Another site, Global Firepower, ranks countries taking all that sort of stuff into account.
2013-04-05 10:30:11 AM
1 votes:

The Bestest: Uchiha_Cycliste: ooh! India?

India

Per Global Security:

1 China 1,600,000
2 South Korea 1,240,000
3 United States 1,125,000
4 India 1,120,000
5 North Korea 1,000,000
6 Israel 633,000
7 Pakistan 550,000
8 Russia 415,000
9 Vietnam 410,000
10 Turkey 400,000


wow! Thanks. I would have guessed we were number one (based on spending). I also guessed that Russia was in the top 5. Though the article says that SK has 655,000 (active)  not 1.24M Anyways, thanks.
2013-04-05 10:29:47 AM
1 votes:
My guess is that this will go down like Jonestown x 100k. The whole nation will drink the final batch of Kool-Aid, the military leaders will gun down any who dissent, eliminate as much of their own rank and file as they can without catching a bullet themselves, and then surrender to South Korea in exchange for amnesty from the genocide they committed.
2013-04-05 10:28:52 AM
1 votes:
I'm going to start dropping this in every NK thread, it's an excellent no-BS writeup on the military capabilities of the DPRK.  It's almost a year old now, but the conclusions reached here can be easily extended to the new hardware/nukes that they've shown they possess, the end result is the same.

http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-bet we en-rhetoric-and-reality/#introduction

One of the points made in there is that if the DPRK attempts to invade or cross the DMZ, they have to move however many hundreds of thousands of men through 3 well-defined paths that the SK's have had 50 years to map out, fortify, and build defenses around.  They would have to do this in a couple thousand thin-skinned vehicles, and in order to have any chance to overwhelm the enemy they would have to do it all at once, which means that the SK's would hear/see/feel them coming through either OP stations, satellite imagery, or ground sensors.  Also, a bunch of their artillery is hardened shelters, but must be uncovered from those shelters to fire accurately, then brought back in, and so on.

Long story short is that the DPRK has no effective logistical support for a campaign lasting longer than 2 weeks, much less 2 months.  If this turns out to be a shooting war, the regime is effectively finished.
2013-04-05 10:25:22 AM
1 votes:
5th largest army, huh?
America, China, Russia... ? ... NK.

Who is number 4? Mexico? Brazil?
2013-04-05 10:25:02 AM
1 votes:

StrikitRich: My understanding is that only 2 F-22s were sent over for show.


Those bad boys have super cruise and we keep a good number of them in the general pacific region.  We could make that 2 turn into a much bigger number in about 6 hours.  That's power projection, something that the US happens to be very good at.
2013-04-05 10:22:50 AM
1 votes:

Supracentral: They should be asking about the  quality of the NK Military. Numbers don't mean much when you're comparing Type 59's and T-62's to M1 Abrams and MIG-21's to F-22's....


Hell, NK is still fielding a significant number of T-34s!  Yeah, their quality is crap and due to fuel shortages I doubt the tank drivers and fighter pilots get a lot of actual training time.

Slartibartfaster: flying the B2 was a juvenile move


Spending money on nuclear weapons while your population starves is more juvenile.  What the hell do you want?  These clowns have shown that they won't listen to anything but brute force since Kim Il-Sung died.
2013-04-05 10:15:26 AM
1 votes:

TV's Vinnie: Slartibartfaster: TV's Vinnie: China might not want to piss off their #1 debtor, who could use a war powers act to render all their debts to China null and void

They have already traded those with other nations, so if you null and void them you are going to piss off half the planet.

And your solution is......what? Let Fatty DingDongs get away with nuclear aggression?


nuclear threats, he has no ability to deliver and if he does others will smack him down
China could stop him with a timeout, if the USA gets involved it will be far more complicated
2013-04-05 10:09:15 AM
1 votes:

dukeblue219: Fireproof: Anyone asking about the size of the NK military needs to RTFA:

That graphic is VERY misleading. There's simply NO comparison between the 4,100 tanks the North supposedly has versus the 2,400 the South has. They would likely not face each other because the North doesn't have fuel to run them and if they did, American/Korean airpower would destroy them.

The idea that the North Koreans have more "combat aircraft" than the South is laughable if technically true. The North's most numerous fighter is the MiG-21 and they still have MiG-17's in the inventory. The South and the Americans have F-16's, F-15's, and F-22's which would decimate eliminate any force the North could even get off the ground.


FTFY,  Dont use that word except for its intended purpose.  If all we did was "decimate" their tanks and planes then it would be a laughably ineffective battle.
2013-04-05 10:05:33 AM
1 votes:

Slartibartfaster: TV's Vinnie: China might not want to piss off their #1 debtor, who could use a war powers act to render all their debts to China null and void

They have already traded those with other nations, so if you null and void them you are going to piss off half the planet.


And your solution is......what? Let Fatty DingDongs get away with nuclear aggression?
2013-04-05 10:05:01 AM
1 votes:
i46.tinypic.com
2013-04-05 10:04:23 AM
1 votes:
A guy from China once told me he'd spent the required time in the army there but had only ever fired 5 shots from a weapon. He asked me how many times I had fired a gun (I've never been in the militar, but I'm from the rural U.S.), and not wanting to make him feel awkward, I lied and said about 200.

If that's the kind of underfunded training most of Best Korea's troops have, I wish them a safe journey across the Styx.
2013-04-05 09:53:03 AM
1 votes:

dukeblue219: bighairyguy: On the ground, they have tons of tanks and artiliary too.

Their tanks are T-55s and similar. We're talking about the worst equipment Saddam had in the Gulf War, which was no match for US technology 22 years ago. US firepower would completely and utterly destroy their army. The only question is how long it would take and how many casualties the NK would inflict while they go down. Would their soldiers fight to the last man and hide in the mountains like the Japanese did in the Pacific, or would they give up just to get a hot meal once they see all their equipment blown to pieces?


I think our best strategy would be to carpet-bomb them with Big Macs.
2013-04-05 09:51:26 AM
1 votes:

HMS_Blinkin: it wouldn't be like Iraq where we were nearly going it alone


You ignore the coalition of the willing, such sacrifices made by great nations such as the kingdom of Tonga
2013-04-05 09:40:02 AM
1 votes:

stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)


That's not the problem. The problem is that there is no good outcome for China. A peaceful reunification strengthens the US in a region where China is already sick of playing the underdog. A messy revolution sends waves of poverty stricken refugees into a region of China which is struggling to manage its existing populace. China really doesn't want western mining companies operating in NK. Even if all of those were resolved there's still an ideological question, for China, hanging over US actions in nominally Communist countries.
2013-04-05 09:36:59 AM
1 votes:
www.hindustantimes.com

"No ya silly fark, we'll get bombed from that direction."
2013-04-05 09:35:41 AM
1 votes:

stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)



Given the recent discovery that wars cost money, no Democratic president would want to incurr another 2-3 Trillion under the table. That's best left to Republicans.

Un is actually excited by the Sequester.
2013-04-05 09:34:10 AM
1 votes:

WegianWarrior: stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)

North Korea have a large army - experts disagree as to the moral and capability of it, so it's hard to say how 'good' it might be in a shooting war.


Morale-wise, the NK army is full od psychos. Raised their entire lives to die for Best leader.

Equipment wise, that's a question. Unless China has been sending them at least 80's era surplus, all NK has are 60's-era junk and whatever they could get smuggled in from Iran.
2013-04-05 09:33:53 AM
1 votes:

KarmicDisaster: This armchair general says:
During the first 24 hrs, we would destroy their C&C, their air force, their power "grid", such as it is, any air defenses, and any fixed artillery positions in range of SK. Then with complete air superiority it would be a longer matter of just waiting for any vehicle or troops to move on a road and hitting that, maybe with hitting some fixed positions as they are discovered.  The hunkered down troops would have no way to resupply and no orders and no way to move; I'd just wait them out; they will make a mistake. This phase might take months, but why attack fixed positions, let nature take it's course.


Probably the safest course of action for SK and US military as well as SK civilians.  I would add to that though, that we'd want to get all of our assets focused on capturing and/or killing the various generals, Communist party leaders, and Kim himself.  NK's whole "pyramid scheme" is kind of held together by threats and power at the top, so decapitating the regime may facilitate things.
2013-04-05 09:31:29 AM
1 votes:

nekom: stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)

Little over a million troops, but old Soviet and Chinese equipment. Major fuel issues. They do, however, have a lot of artillery that could be pointed at Seoul. They absolutely can't win, and I'm inclined to believe U.S. intelligence estimates that their capacity to make war could be destroyed in mere hours, but it may not be pretty. And what happens to the ensuing power vacuum, that remains a big unknown. The U.S. will not occupy best Korea, we'll just knock their military down. I suppose worst Korea comes in then? Or China. Who knows.


Korea Disney, Mall of Korea, NASCAR Korea, Sports Arenas World Korea, McDonald's.
2013-04-05 09:21:55 AM
1 votes:

bighairyguy: On the ground, they have tons of tanks and artiliary too.


Their tanks are T-55s and similar. We're talking about the worst equipment Saddam had in the Gulf War, which was no match for US technology 22 years ago. US firepower would completely and utterly destroy their army. The only question is how long it would take and how many casualties the NK would inflict while they go down. Would their soldiers fight to the last man and hide in the mountains like the Japanese did in the Pacific, or would they give up just to get a hot meal once they see all their equipment blown to pieces?
2013-04-05 09:15:57 AM
1 votes:

stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)


Much like the Iraqi Republican Guard, NK has some elite units.  Those will be the ones who surrender in droves first.
2013-04-05 09:12:05 AM
1 votes:

stuhayes2010: Does N Korea have a good army?  Or would this be another Gulf War? (over in days)


North Korea have a large army - experts disagree as to the moral and capability of it, so it's hard to say how 'good' it might be in a shooting war.
 
Displayed 53 of 53 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report