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.

(Yahoo)   Detailed breakdown of N. Korea's military capabilities. Based on the provided photo, they have recently had to lower the draft age to the third trimester   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 96
    More: Interesting, North Koreans, Korean People's Army, United States and South Korea, International Institute for Strategic Studies, international relations, guerrilla war, yellow sea, South Korean government  
•       •       •

18306 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Apr 2013 at 9:38 AM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-25 07:51:31 AM
FTFA: Seoul estimates North Korea has about 200,000 special forces, and Pyongyang has used them before.

They closely copy the American special forces who are left in the wilderness with nothing to eat and forced to survive on their own for a week.
The North Koreans do this year round.
 
2013-04-25 08:08:37 AM
None of this matters. This isn't 1950, wars no longer work that way.
 
2013-04-25 08:09:22 AM
the North relies on the element of surprise.


i34.tinypic.com
 
2013-04-25 08:16:04 AM
"In 1996, 26 North Korean agents infiltrated South Korea's northeastern mountains after their submarine broke down, sparking a manhunt ..."

Uhhhhh
 
2013-04-25 08:25:54 AM

MoonPirate: "In 1996, 26 North Korean agents infiltrated South Korea's northeastern mountains after their submarine broke down, sparking a manhunt ..."

Uhhhhh


I think I know why it broke down...
 
2013-04-25 08:55:10 AM
This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.
 
2013-04-25 08:59:15 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.


Not to mention extreme fuel shortages, a lack of proper maintenance and a lack of qualified pilots (need fuel even for training).

Air dominance would be achieved within a few short hours, then it would be for all intents and purposes over.
 
2013-04-25 09:00:16 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.


And little of the fuel required to operate them.
 
2013-04-25 09:28:27 AM
South Korea says North Korea has more than 13,000 artillery guns

All pointed south. Most already targeting where it would hurt the most. You don't need fuel or technology for that to be intimidating.


/CRC 94-95
 
2013-04-25 09:35:37 AM
I want to know where all those starving people will get the strength needed to throw their missile.
 
2013-04-25 09:39:17 AM

PreMortem: South Korea says North Korea has more than 13,000 artillery guns

All pointed south. Most already targeting where it would hurt the most. You don't need fuel or technology for that to be intimidating.


/CRC 94-95


That is admittedly a scary prospect for worst Korea. If even 10% of them are in firing condition, it could turn Seoul into a nightmare. That's the ONLY card they have to play, and it would be the end of the regime.

What would the loss of life in Seoul and other cities in the south be vs. another 60 years of this cold war relic existing? That's the tough question.
 
2013-04-25 09:40:14 AM
I hear they got a fresh shipment of rubber bands for their slingshots.
 
2013-04-25 09:41:19 AM
I hope we do not see a repeat of this type of photo setting for the North Koreans

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2013-04-25 09:44:12 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.


/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.
 
2013-04-25 09:49:20 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.


Say what?

Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets
 
2013-04-25 09:50:27 AM

PreMortem: South Korea says North Korea has more than 13,000 artillery guns

All pointed south. Most already targeting where it would hurt the most. You don't need fuel or technology for that to be intimidating.


/CRC 94-95


I've read that a surprising amount of NK artillery (and AA)  is located around Pyongyang, and a quite a few guns face north.  Not that that means Seoul is safe or anything like that---but at least not ALL 13k guns are a direct threat to Seoul.
 
2013-04-25 09:52:46 AM

Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets


I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.
 
2013-04-25 09:55:10 AM

nekom: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

Not to mention extreme fuel shortages, a lack of proper maintenance and a lack of qualified pilots (need fuel even for training).

Air dominance would be achieved within a few short hours, then it would be for all intents and purposes over.


Just because North Korea can't win a war, doesn't mean that South Korea can either. (why does this have to be repeated constantly? Is the concept of MAD hard to grasp?).

If your capital is flattened and/or radioactive, you didn't win in any meaningful way.
 
2013-04-25 09:56:46 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.


Crap, yes.  Off by one number.

(Naturally, this invalidates my entire argument and I'm a complete gibbering moron for getting it wrong.)

Your point about modern-day obsolescence is a good one, though.  I got distracted talking about WWII.
 
2013-04-25 09:58:54 AM
NK knows that they cannot win an outright war.  They're hoping that it will be a Pyrrhic victory for SK and/or the US.
 
2013-04-25 10:02:49 AM

Bondith: Crap, yes.  Off by one number.

(Naturally, this invalidates my entire argument and I'm a complete gibbering moron for getting it wrong.)

Your point about modern-day obsolescence is a good one, though.  I got distracted talking about WWII.


Meh, I'm not the kind of pedant that thinks a typo invalidates an argument.  And you had a good point as well---NK can't sustain a Zerg rush like the USSR did---they haven't the fuel, ammo, or food for that, just a bunch of emaciated stunted guys with AKs who might forget about the Dear Leader when they see their first McDonald's.  And equipment quality is also not a great comparison: Russian equipment in WWII was, overall, just a touch inferior to German equipment (with some exceptions like IL-2s and T-34s).  NK equipment, on the other hand, is whole decades, even generations, inferior to the SK and US weapons it would be facing.
 
2013-04-25 10:03:11 AM
I worked with an IT guy who'd served with a U.S. artillery unit near the DMZ.  He told me there were all sorts of unreported, classified shenanigans that went on.

/and that the only part of his tour that didn't suck was a little R&R in Australia
 
2013-04-25 10:03:52 AM

spawn73:
Just because North Korea can't win a war, doesn't mean that South Korea can either. (why does this have to be repeated constantly? Is the concept of MAD hard to grasp?).

If your capital is flattened and/or radioactive, you didn't win in any meaningful way.


Well, that's a whole other matter. At this point in time, MAD does NOT exist in DPRK in any way whatsoever. They have a few nukes (maybe) that might possibly work and probably can't be delivered... yet. So what's the plan then? Wait until he has a few dozen deliverable nukes? Is that the endgame here that you think is best?

There wouldn't even BE a war, there would be potential artillery barrage on the south concurrent with utter obliteration of all military assets from the air, including their million strong standing army marching into a minefield with heavy air dominance and gunfire from the U.S./Worst Korean joint forces. It would be a bloody mess, yes, but it would be over quick. What would happen next is the really interesting thing to ponder. Who would fill the power vacuum? China? Worst Korea?
 
2013-04-25 10:04:23 AM
media.wtfunny.com
 
2013-04-25 10:05:28 AM

IndyMBA: NK knows that they cannot win an outright war.  They're hoping that it will be a Pyrrhic victory for SK and/or the US.


But even a Pyrrhic victory would mean the Kim regime would be wiped out.  And that's really NK's only interest---keeping their current crappy government in power.  They're trying to deter SK/US from even attempting anything, because a Pyrrhic victory for SK/US is still complete and utter annihilation for NK.
 
2013-04-25 10:07:47 AM

FarkingReading: [media.wtfunny.com image 480x400]


Thread needs more of Best Korea.
blogs.reuters.com
 
2013-04-25 10:08:47 AM
I'd be most concerned about the immediate frontline attack in the short term and the guerrilla warfare in the long term. NK probably has enough fuel for an initial border attack that would kill a lot of innocent people due to sheer proximity to populated SK cities like Seoul before they can out of supplies. But I imagine NK is perfectly aware of this and has tonnes of special-ops forces trained to kill people from the shadows and keep everyone on edge for years.
 
2013-04-25 10:09:10 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.


Since you're listing Japan as following a "communistic version of war", you could also list the United States Army's tactics against the Confederacy.  More men and material were shoved against the South until their enemy broke.

However, in serious criticism, the Soviets did have some technological advantages against the German forces in WW2, particularly with the T-34 tank and it's sloped armor.  This was a technical coup that the Heer and Waffen SS were reeling against for a few years, leading to their development of the Panther's style hull.
 
2013-04-25 10:09:16 AM

HMS_Blinkin: IndyMBA: NK knows that they cannot win an outright war.  They're hoping that it will be a Pyrrhic victory for SK and/or the US.

But even a Pyrrhic victory would mean the Kim regime would be wiped out.  And that's really NK's only interest---keeping their current crappy government in power.  They're trying to deter SK/US from even attempting anything, because a Pyrrhic victory for SK/US is still complete and utter annihilation for NK.


Agreed.  Maintenance of the status quo is their preference.  I was speaking more along the lines of a hypothetical war scenario (i.e., if NK attacked SK or vice versa).
 
2013-04-25 10:09:44 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Meh, I'm not the kind of pedant that thinks a typo invalidates an argument


Yeah, I wasn't really addressing that to you, but I've seen a lot of Internet flamewars.  I know how it can play out.

/been That Guy once or twice, I think
 
2013-04-25 10:13:08 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.


But the T-35 is a hoot!

www.tanksinworldwar2.com

Five turrets and u-boat style railing around the conning tower!
 
2013-04-25 10:14:37 AM

Bondith: Bit'O'Gristle: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.

Say what?

Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets


The russians would have had to walk it as well with out all those Dodge trucks the U.S handed over during lend lease.
 
2013-04-25 10:17:57 AM

spawn73: nekom: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

Not to mention extreme fuel shortages, a lack of proper maintenance and a lack of qualified pilots (need fuel even for training).

Air dominance would be achieved within a few short hours, then it would be for all intents and purposes over.

Just because North Korea can't win a war, doesn't mean that South Korea can either. (why does this have to be repeated constantly? Is the concept of MAD hard to grasp?).

If your capital is flattened and/or radioactive, you didn't win in any meaningful way.

Bondith: Bit'O'Gristle: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.

Say what?

Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets


Last I heard, the DMZ was still there.  From what I've also heard, the Korean war era sherman tank did well against the T-35, showing its age already.

You might want to ask some [East] Germans just how effective WWII era Soviet artillery is in destroying cities.  Although the common claim of "10,000 pieces of artillery pointed at Seoul" seems to ignore just how far 35 miles is to artillery.  Purpose-built artillery can do it (and often has rocket assist), but this type of thing is extremely exotic, not something you could buy from the post-Soviet military collapse.  I'd also suspect that you would have to refurbish the rocket assists and other other chemical components every once in awhile, not to mention things like the need to "re-bore" massive cannons after too many shots.

Then again, this is Fark.  We freak out over two tiny IEDs that fit inside pressure cookers [as long as they go boom in the USA], but are blase about hundreds of massive artillery shells raining on most of the population of Korea.
 
2013-04-25 10:22:10 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.


A tank in 1950 is still a tank today. It is as deadly today as it was then. Sure the military have more powerful weapons today to counter it but that is like saying the baretta model 1911 is useless because it's a 100 yr old tech or a crossbow is ineffective because it;s a 1000 yrs old!

I'm sure an AK-47 can kill a human in the yr 2050 just as effective it it kills one today!
 
2013-04-25 10:23:51 AM
If the Chinese decide to build drones it will probably look something like this

i2.photobucket.com

Not thousands but millions and millions of them. Each carrying a chunk of explosives. All cardboard or wood.

So if pizza deliveries in China start growing exponentially, look out and look up.
 
2013-04-25 10:29:00 AM

MoonPirate: "In 1996, 26 North Korean agents infiltrated South Korea's northeastern mountains after their submarine broke down, sparking a manhunt ..."

Uhhhhh.


They bought it from the newspapers with their milk carton money. They were convinced it would work.
 
2013-04-25 10:30:57 AM

SuperNinjaToad: HMS_Blinkin: Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.

A tank in 1950 is still a tank today. It is as deadly today as it was then. Sure the military have more powerful weapons today to counter it but that is like saying the baretta model 1911 is useless because it's a 100 yr old tech or a crossbow is ineffective because it;s a 1000 yrs old!

I'm sure an AK-47 can kill a human in the yr 2050 just as effective it it kills one today!


nonsense a outmoded weapon system like the T34 is simply a moving coffin. Most modern infantry would have the means to take them out with out need for armor or air backup. I would not want to be one of those tank crews. sure it can kill if it gets the chance but it wouldn't be given the opportunity.
 
2013-04-25 10:33:39 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: PC LOAD LETTER: This article whitewashes the utter obsolescence of NK's military equipment. They have a few modern pieces, but the vast majority of their air force runs planes from the 1960s and 1970s, and without the nice avionics upgrades that make the B52 still viable.

/As i have said before, they follow the communistic version of war.  You don't need the cutting edge military equipment, or even well trained soldiers.  You just need lots of craptastic tanks, and millions of cannon fodder foot infantry to over run your opponent.  The japanese did it, the koreans, and the russians.  Ten thousand troops apposing you with great tanks and weapons? Send 1 million troops at them.  Sure, you will lose allot of men, and equipment, but the communist viewpoint, at least the governments of such, don't really care so much. As long as they win.


How do they fare against drones and automated turrets?

Last I checked the South Koreans had deployed a farkton of automated defense turrets up and down the border with North Korea.
 
2013-04-25 10:33:49 AM

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: HMS_Blinkin: Bondith: Nitpick aside, the Zerg rush is a time-honoured Russian tactic, but only works if you have infinite reserves (and there are always more Russians).  However, I would argue the T-35 rated a tad better than "craptastic", plus the USSR has US and British industry supporting it.  It's a lot easier to maintain a zerg rush when all of your soldiers have guns.

/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

I assume you meant T-34, and yes, it was outstanding in WWII.  The trouble is that NK is STILL using some T-34s in front line service in 2013 (and everything else is T-55 and T-62).  So "craptastic" is a pretty good description today.

But the T-35 is a hoot!

[www.tanksinworldwar2.com image 500x301]

Five turrets and u-boat style railing around the conning tower!


"Hans, is that thing going to shell us or torpedo us?"
 
2013-04-25 10:34:06 AM
Bondith:
/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

That would make a big difference.

/if we were playing Risk
 
2013-04-25 10:38:44 AM
DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke:
But the T-35 is a hoot!

[www.tanksinworldwar2.com image 500x301]

Five turrets and u-boat style railing around the conning tower!


So, technically, it could shoot itself.

/bet it's happened too
//how many gunners in the crew?
 
2013-04-25 10:39:08 AM
That's a picture of the heir-apparent Kim Jong Googoo.
 
2013-04-25 10:43:09 AM
That is one of their adults, submitter. They are a tiny people.
 
2013-04-25 10:44:18 AM

MBooda: Bondith:
/China has more soldiers than we have bullets

That would make a big difference.

/if we were playing Risk


No, China would take its massive army to Alaska and then just sit there rolling 1s while we rolled 6s.

/I hate that game sometimes
//Dice are cursed
 
2013-04-25 10:45:52 AM
Do they have any Tsars?
www.toptenz.net
 
2013-04-25 10:49:20 AM
NK is a state terrorist. They could cause fark tons of civilian casualties, and wreak havoc on the world economy. They don't need to "win" a war, they just want to extort some money and aid. In the absence of that, they just want the world to hurt.
 
2013-04-25 10:50:31 AM

MBooda: Do they have any Tsars?
[www.toptenz.net image 560x394]


Do they have any Vzdekhods?

www.nemo.nu

/it is interesting to ponder what would have happened in Russia if the farking Tsar had allowed more reforms. Tsarist Russia's national output was doing what the Chicoms have been doing. Till they farked it all up
 
2013-04-25 11:02:46 AM

nekom: spawn73:
Just because North Korea can't win a war, doesn't mean that South Korea can either. (why does this have to be repeated constantly? Is the concept of MAD hard to grasp?).

If your capital is flattened and/or radioactive, you didn't win in any meaningful way.

Well, that's a whole other matter. At this point in time, MAD does NOT exist in DPRK in any way whatsoever. They have a few nukes (maybe) that might possibly work and probably can't be delivered... yet. So what's the plan then? Wait until he has a few dozen deliverable nukes? Is that the endgame here that you think is best?

There wouldn't even BE a war, there would be potential artillery barrage on the south concurrent with utter obliteration of all military assets from the air, including their million strong standing army marching into a minefield with heavy air dominance and gunfire from the U.S./Worst Korean joint forces. It would be a bloody mess, yes, but it would be over quick. What would happen next is the really interesting thing to ponder. Who would fill the power vacuum? China? Worst Korea?


I'm not sure not sure what you mean by MAD not existing. That Best Korea has nothing to loose? I don't think that's true, unless Kim and his croonies think they can continue their lavish lifestyle in China after it goes down.

Knowing that Best Korea does have nukes (look it up if you're not sure. Maybe you haven't been following their recent and undisputed tests), then MAD is in effect as far as Worst Korea is concerned given that it can´t be that bloody hard to get a nuke delivered that short of a distance. We have to assume that they've already planed how to do it as well.

---

I assume the outcome is that China and USA just controls the north under a UN mandate, which is probably fine with China as they can get their hands on whatever resources there are.
 
2013-04-25 11:07:55 AM

MBooda: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke:
But the T-35 is a hoot!

[www.tanksinworldwar2.com image 500x301]

Five turrets and u-boat style railing around the conning tower!

So, technically, it could shoot itself.

/bet it's happened too
//how many gunners in the crew?


Crew of 10 inside the tank, plus two technicians accompanying.
 
2013-04-25 11:08:49 AM
Seriously, fark those guys.
 
Displayed 50 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report