North korea threatens nukes

Originally posted by normbenign
They haven't got food to feed their troops or fuel to move all those tanks and artillery pieces. Their first strike at the DMZ if a surprise could be devastating, but they have no answer to the array of killing machines in the US arsenal of conventional weapons.

Desperate, cornered men fight the hardest. They've got nothing to lose. They're already starving!

Fancy standoff weapons aren't enough. Have we already forgotten the significance of boots on the ground?!

Originally posted by utherpendragon
I know it aint serbia. Its a peninsula! sitting ducks! They would get the living crap bombed out of them from our Navy plus relentless air strikes. Their nation is in shambles and starving already. I highly doubt they could hold out. They dont have the resources to fight a all out war for any extended period of time.
If they ever did attempt a nuke ...[text shortened]... not stand by and let N.Korea start WW3 at their doorstep. They surely would join in to end them.

Rubbing one out at the thought of nuking all those starving Koreans, eh uther? And I bet you think you're the good guy in this scenario too.

Originally posted by FMF
How many times does this have to come up? Why is it that Neville Chamberlain and not Édouard Daladier comes to your mind?

I dont know. Care to psycho analyze me Doc? 🙂

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Rubbing one out at the thought of nuking all those starving Koreans, eh uther? And I bet you think you're the good guy in this scenario too.

The hypothetical scenario we were discussing is if they attacked first as they are threatening to do in reality dumb ass.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
I dont know.

I am not really inclined to take a lecture on the issue of appeasement from someone who mentions Neville Chamberlain ahead of Édouard Daladier, seeing as this preference indicates a flawed understanding of the period 1936-1940. Most people agree that, militarily, France could have put a stop to German ambitions in 1938. Would you have us believe that Britain could have done so without the help of the French?

Originally posted by FMF
I am not really inclined to take a lecture on the issue of appeasement from someone who mentions Neville Chamberlain ahead of Édouard Daladier, seeing as this preference indicates a flawed understanding of the period 1936-1940. Most people agree that, militarily, France could have put a stop to German ambitions in 1938. Would you have us believe that Britain could have done so without the help of the French?

no you are right.he just popped into my mind first.sorry no offense meant.😳

Originally posted by utherpendragon
no you are right.he just popped into my mind first.sorry no offense meant.

It's not a matter of "offence". It's just a matter of whether you understand the history or you don't.

If not sinking a N.Korean ship - any N.Korean ship - in retaliation for the sinking of the S.Korean ship, makes you think of how World War Two started, what do you think about the joint military exercises that the U.S. and R.O.K. are staging?

Originally posted by FMF
It's not a matter of "offence". It's just a matter of whether you understand the history or you don't.

If not sinking a N.Korean ship - any N.Korean ship - in retaliation for the sinking of the S.Korean ship, makes you think of how World War Two started, what do you think about the joint military exercises that the U.S. and R.O.K. are staging?

"If not sinking a N.Korean ship - any N.Korean ship - in retaliation for the sinking of the S.Korean ship, makes you think of how World War Two started,"-fmf

you lost me on this one. I have no idea what you are talking about

As far as as the military exercises,thats what the military does.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
"If not sinking a N.Korean ship - any N.Korean ship - in retaliation for the sinking of the S.Korean ship, makes you think of how World War Two started,"-fmf

you lost me on this one. I have no idea what you are talking about

Originally posted by normbenign
[N.Korea] might just be emboldened by their act of war sinking a S. Korean ship without any consequence.

Originally posted by FMF
What "consequence" should there have been to your way of thinking?

Originally posted by normbenign
I'm pretty sure we or the S. Koreans could have found a N. Korean ship to sink.

Originally posted by FMF
You think the U.S. or the S. Koreans finding a N. Korean ship and sinking it would stop N.Korea? Stop them from what?

Originally posted by normbenign
Further threats of agression and agression. When you get away with something, you are emboldened to push a bit farther. Non response is most often taken for weakness and lack of resolve.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Neville Chamberlain comes to mind.

Originally posted by FMF
If not sinking a N.Korean ship - any N.Korean ship - in retaliation for the sinking of the S.Korean ship, makes you think of how World War Two started [Chamberlain and Daladier], what do you think about the joint military exercises that the U.S. and R.O.K. are staging?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
you lost me on this one. I have no idea what you are talking about

It seems you can even follow a discussion that you contribute to.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
As far as as the military exercises,thats what the military does.

Are these exercises a sufficient or appropriate response to your way of thinking ?

Originally posted by FMF
Compared to Iraq, how easy do you think it would be for the U.S. militray to beat or overrun the North, assuming resort to nuclear weapons was not practicable?

If NK uses nukes the US should use them. There is no need for invasion of any kind. 😀

Originally posted by normbenign
They haven't got food to feed their troops or fuel to move all those tanks and artillery pieces. Their first strike at the DMZ if a surprise could be devastating, but they have no answer to the array of killing machines in the US arsenal of conventional weapons.

About all they do feed is their troops and their military exercises over the last 10 years have shown they can deploy troops and equipment rapidly.

Of course, if the US put a significant force i.e. Gulf War I sized in the field, they could defeat the North Koreans rather handily. I just don't see that type of force available given the constraints of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I do not believe that air power alone can defeat an army the size and strength of the North Koreans; they have been preparing for war against the US for 50+ years and are aware they wouldn't have control of the air.

Originally posted by whodey
If NK uses nukes the US should use them. There is no need for invasion of any kind. 😀

How many million North Koreans would you willing to kill in that scenario? All of them?

The Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans might not be too happy with the use of nuclear weapons and resulting fallout it would cause in the area.

Originally posted by no1marauder
How many million North Koreans would you willing to kill in that scenario? All of them?

The Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans might not be too happy with the use of nuclear weapons and resulting fallout it would cause in the area.

But they would be OK if North Korea used them and nothing was done?