jillyz12
Active member
Oh God....here we go.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...an-president/2012/04/23/gIQA5MTdbT_story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...an-president/2012/04/23/gIQA5MTdbT_story.html
N.K. has large number of guns well dug in, probably couldn't take them out before significant damage would be done.North Korea threatens us all the time. I don't see much of a difference. It is getting to the point I wouldn't mind a cinokete assassination of those in power (by whatever means). I really just want someone to end it without nukes of course.
If we strike first we will probably be seen as the wrong-doer. The only real danger N.K has on us is China will probably side with them and the fact they can level S.K's capital.
Don't our military have the capabilities to knock out N.K's artillery before they can do too much damage? I guess such an action will be spotted before we carry out such an attack. Oh well, I guess we will have to settle for the same BS that we been going through for for awhile now.
I don't know what their action will be, but an artillery attack will force the South Koreans to invade in order to silence the guns. The SKAF will have air superiority very early on.
I think a (suicide) commando operation is more likely, because I don't see how you kan kill someone with a cyber attack. Maybe they already have a 5th column inside SK.
Anyway, an attack that kills the political leader(s) of SK means war. NK is playing with fire.
North Korea threatens us all the time. I don't see much of a difference. It is getting to the point I wouldn't mind a cinokete assassination of those in power (by whatever means). I really just want someone to end it without nukes of course.
If we strike first we will probably be seen as the wrong-doer. The only real danger N.K has on us is China will probably side with them and the fact they can level S.K's capital.
Don't our military have the capabilities to knock out N.K's artillery before they can do too much damage? I guess such an action will be spotted before we carry out such an attack. Oh well, I guess we will have to settle for the same BS that we been going through for for awhile now.
Personally I think they should just offer a years free food to every North Korean that turns in a member of the ruling parties head and the South will never have to fire a shot.
Personally I think they should just offer a years free food to every North Korean that turns in a member of the ruling parties head and the South will never have to fire a shot.
Surely this would once again unleash a blood bath on the penisulia.
N.K. has a very very comprhesive surface to air defense grid and is not afraid to use it. Underestimating N.K. in terms of dedication to cause and ability as such would be foolish.
But as far as any lengthy military engament into the South, I think they lack the food and fuel to stay there for any length of time.
But with an average N.K. Soldier being indoctrinated in the mindset of everything for the state since birth you can expect some very very savage fighting on their part, with or without ideal supplies and Chinese intervention.
As for China, China doesn't not always approve nor want a war there either, China and the U.S. share a lot of economic ties and allot of Chinese jobs and families depend on American money just like American's depend on their questionable goods, and the fact is nobody over here wants to admit that until something like a war in Korea would cut off the facuet and send China into a economic slum.
China stopped NK from talking too much plenty of times. I just believe China should step aside or join the U.N in its opinions of NK. .
That is what cruise missiles are for Yoss.
If we hit them we need to hit them hard and swift like we did Iraq.
Personally I think they should just offer a years free food to every North Korean that turns in a member of the ruling parties head and the South will never have to fire a shot.
If you are an American like me looking realisticly at this tender box, then first things first, we have to take off the beer goggles and put on someone else's shoes.
We also have no proof except the fact they are brainwashed to know if they will "fight to the death" or whatever. I am 100% certain if we master hearts and minds strategies it would be much easier. Feed the NK people as you go from place to place to make sure they know you are not the bad guys.
I am saying I wouldn't mind of all the wars we have that NK be the target. Of course that is considering that we are successful in keeping China and Russia out of it.
Are you talking about NK's shoes? I already understand China's reasoning for not dealing with NK, I just believe they should drop it. We hear stories of people escaping NK about how tragic it all is. Iraq and Afghanistan are nothing like NK so I do not think the humanitarian effort would be as huge. Those two countries had many factions trying to grab for power and using religion as their way to recruit more. The only way an insurgency in NK would be like Iraq and Afghanistan is if a foriegn country (china) helped them do it. There is only 2 land borders for NK, they wouldn't be able to pull of a Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan the way I see it.
We also have no proof except the fact they are brainwashed to know if they will "fight to the death" or whatever. I am 100% certain if we master hearts and minds strategies it would be much easier. Feed the NK people as you go from place to place to make sure they know you are not the bad guys.
I am not saying we should use forceful means to end this, I am saying I wouldn't mind of all the wars we have that NK be the target. Of course that is considering that we are successful in keeping China and Russia out of it.
Alot of "ifs" in these paragraphs. Be careful not to fall into the "rose colored glasses" trap. Never underestimate the will of an enemy to resist even if you're working in their best interest. The simple fact that an invader is on their land, whether it be UN, US, or SK would be reason enough for many of the relatively moderate members of their society to resist...let alone the hard core guys.
Also, how on earth would we pay for such a military frenzy? What about the South Koreans? They would be the ones who would be left with the tab and the refugees in the end. So what if the country is unified...they would all of a sudded go from a first world nation status to a third world status over night. Not to mention the tens of millions more mouths to feed, adults to work, sick/ wounded to be hospitalized, and re-integration and re-education of the northerners when it is all said and done...It would be cataclysmic for the regions stability and for our South Korean ally that has been so loyal for over 60 years now. We should let the South Koreans take the lead on this, they are the ones who will pay the most dearly after all.
Easier said than done, this was tried in Vietnam and is currently under way in Afghanistan, most of all I think the deciding factor in the "hearts and minds" category, is that if the people don't have the heart or piece of mind then all efforts from any outside party will be useless.
Not saying in N.K. this won't be a success, just from recent history it shows that it hasn't really worked just yet.
I agree peaceful means should be paramount as well.
As for using force , I think the application of force should be reserved, and very well reactionary, not pro active in nature and scope.
Any use of force should be ran by and approved by China, since it's on there border and considering their track record on affairs in Korea..., and maybe even Russia to assure that no larger conflict erupts with either party.
If anyone hasn't noticed, the world isn't on the best economic footing even a few years after the great recession a war would just throw this "recovery" right into a major cluster^(*@. Especially in a global market.
As for underestimating the N.K., I still stand firm they should be treated as a serious threat. It would be unwise to try and cowboy it over the DMZ with American Standards flying high.
Remeber, there was a war here once before, a short but very brutal and hellish one at that.
Of course I am not saying it will be easy, however, it will not be as difficult as Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. I stated why I believe this in my last post didn't I?
Only 2 borders they have: SK-NK border and China-NK border. Not to mention the country isn't as huge. As far as I know there isn't 3+ factions trying to grab for power at all times. For an insurgency, it would be pretty difficult to keep up, especially considering intel missions wouldn't be as difficult. So long as you block entrance to the waters and watch China's border.
Approved by China I agree, but I am not sure about the "ran by" part.
It would have been over quickly if China didn't get involved and as long as we can keep them from getting involved somehow, it will be just as quick (the main campaign).
Since when did our military cowboy there way doing things? They always did great planning. The only thing they didn't plan as well (partly thanks to the Iraq war) was the rebuilding. I am sure if they do a campaign against NK it would be with a great deal of care. We will have casualties, but it would be worth it in the long run (moreso than Afghanistan and Iraq the way I see it).
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.