First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply WW3 is at our doors, North Korea vs most powerful countries
55139 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
101 / M
Offline
Posted 4/25/17
I think China was planning on using Kim's Half brother to take over his place.. That probably why Kim had him killed! I don't think China want to give up North Korea, because if South Korea win, it'll finally be Korea (No South or North anymore).. That mean China no longer involve like they used to with North Korea.

22712 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 4/25/17

JanusCascade wrote:

I think China was planning on using Kim's Half brother to take over his place.. That probably why Kim had him killed! I don't think China want to give up North Korea, because if South Korea win, it'll finally be Korea (No South or North anymore).. That mean China no longer involve like they used to with North Korea.



Hum... You might be onto something there. However at this point they have no control and intact North Korea has control over them. If Trump was smart he would have China help him get rid of North Korea while giving them a better situation in the future than they have now. The question is would China accept one Korea as long as it wasn't a threat and we backed off the region a little. China also knows about the tariffs Trump wants to impose and might be willing to help out for less tariffs.
210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 4/26/17
Realistically what would happen is one of three things. North korea ends its temporary ceasefire with south korea, and or fires on japan maybe. Assuming the missle reaches.

The 2nd thing usa invades nk causing russia and china to maybe put up some embargos.

The 3rd highly unlikely, china declares war on usa on behalf of nk. Which wont happen because china has invested a ton of money into america, and america being one if not the biggest consumer of china's goods it would put them into a dire dire dire position economically. Making whatever industrial/democratic republic of china movement come to a crashing halt, leading to god knows how much internal strife. You cannot show millions of people the possibility of a new future and then expect them to go back to working like its the early 1900's. Maybe russia would come in, but whatever political/economical ties russia has with the nk would quickly end. Russia only has ties with the nk to keep an eye the other side of asia as a sort of proxy nation, it has plenty of other ties in that part of the world and the cost of commiting to such a fight is not worth it. Especially considering russia's fight on two fronts already, "Syria, and Ukraine".

IF it came to that assuming that us came in and decided to finally shit on the nk not withstanding the almost immediately guaranteed backing of France and the UK along with a few other eu country's. NK would already be surrounded by japan and then by proxy sk would Have to fight. If it came down to it nk would have no one to turn to. That's assuming forgetting the massive issues it would cause the us/sk if they decided to democratize the nk. Think about it these people barely have any goods let alone services to provide in today's global economy stunted people not just physically but mentally fed a steady paste of hatred and contradictions opposing all modern necessity's lack of internet lack of basic education reading books. Barely sustaining themselves off of the rice they grow. To re educate that giant group of people, the amount of money required to just modernize nk to be like the sk the time. It would literally be the cost of starting an entire industrial revolution in one country.

It wouldn't be worth it economically or strategically as a geo political zone. Why would america want a new base to put troops what closer to china? They already have SK, and japan has american troops as it is. What coal? No their is literally nothing that north korea has that america wants. Other then a potentially insane guy shaking his little stick at a global power. Make an example?

No if anything the best thing for THE nk is to attack a democratic nation like japan or sk. That way other nations would be forced to act and take a piece of the pie and modernize north korea for north korea. Which come to think of it maybe kim isn't as crazy a fuck as we think. Maybe he wants to be invaded? Assuming he's actually thinking in the best interest of the north korean people, and not just a bat shit insane leader. Obviously if NK was invaded and eventually lost the culture would be changed from the ground up. As opposed to him actually going out and trying to make political and cultural reform on his own. It would be the most efficient and effective way for The north to simultaneously get a boon economically and modernize its own culture at the same time.
jdyun2 
16320 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/25/17
Unless Kim Jong Un was never taught about what tends to be happen to countries conquered by a stronger nation, he would be more incompetent than people make him out to be if he wants to get invaded.

As for China and Russia, they won't want the US army on their doorstep, so even if the Korean peninsula becomes one, they would probably want the US army to leave the peninsula. I don't see the US army completely leaving the peninsula unless a united Korea becomes stable. A unified Korean peninsula means a long period economic downturn that will be far worse than what Germany exprienced.
1903 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Online
Posted 4/25/17 , edited 4/26/17
The issue has never been if the USA could take out north Korea. It's At what cost. Seoul South Korea is gone there is no stopping that. The sheer number of weapons pointed at it is not stoppable. Seoul a major world wide economic hub destoryed would trigger a world wide recession. Next Is china the second a weapon is fired they would advance from the north to create a puppet state to act as a buffer between china and then Korea. This will became a country that make north korea look like a glowing 2nd world country. It would become terrorist haven and wretched hive of scum and villainy. Next is The economic impact. You can't just end a government and leave. So we would have to rebuild North korea, and Sadly beside the miltary complex North korea is a country of ruins. There electric grid is unstable or non existant, same with water, gas. Basic things like roads and building are again except for the military complex in shambles. Even their land is rotten from overuse , bad farming pratices, and well punishments they would punish farmer who didn't "pull" there weight by destorying the land. All this Makes North Korea a massive money pit the rebuilding of which will create massive negative economic issues for every country in the area and for the usa. Then their's the what if they do have a ready made nuke. The whole thing gets even messier.

The problem is too many people don't understand North Korea. It's Not a dictaorship. Crazy kim is a figurehead like his father and grand father. North korea is a military dictatorship. Taking out crazy kim will do nothing. You have to remove the entire military and then some.
8130 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 4/25/17

redokami wrote:

Korean war 2.0
first we basically made SK, maybe this time we can make a SINGLE korea


2.0? As someone mentioned above, the outbreak of hostilities would just mean the end of the armistice that has suspended the Korean conflict since the 1950s. To say nothing of the fact that without the support of the Chinese or the Soviets, Pyongyang would likely fall in a matter of hours. Kim Jung Un can't possibly be stupid enough to screw up the great deal he has going living on the backs of "his people" by throwing it away for pride or just to be a dick to S Korea and a couple others.
28257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Kaguya's Panties
Offline
Posted 4/25/17
Not gonna lie actually.. I wanna see some nukes go off. All those people getting vaporized instantly xD
9616 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Behind you!
Offline
Posted 4/26/17
There is nothing to fear.

http://militaryhumor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/military-humor-north-korean-generals.jpg

Unless the NK generals are Daleks, they give out medals for "military experience" to the point they wear them on their pants when the jacket is full. For some reason, I want ferrero rocher chocolate now

Of course, the women in the NK military....

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/92/1c/30/921c3018450367de9d73cee27f9759ac.jpg

Think most men might just surrender to them
20760 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Auburn, Washington
Offline
Posted 4/26/17

zenxpowert wrote:

I just want you to not be surprised if you see WW3 being declared in the next week and nuclear missiles being launched at the USA or to other countries that are participating in this invasion.



If North Korea actually does start an offensive, it will be wiped from the map rather quickly... as long as China doesn't come to their defence.

Which is tremendously unlikely, because Beijing has been losing patience with Pyongyang for a long, long time. Honestly, North Korea is just not that important to China economically, whereas the US consumes the lion's share of their exports. North Korea's entire GDP is less than 10% of Chinese exports to the US, so they literally CAN'T be even one-tenth as important to China's economy as we are. There is very little value to China in being allied with North Korea, even as trade partners, let alone in a military sense. And siding against the US with a country that small is a terrible idea. Kim Jong-Un's sword-rattling is just more of the same, following on from Kim Jong-Il's and Kim Il-Sung's similar behaviour, and after seventy years... China's basically sick and tired of it. Dedication to communist ideals will only take you so far, diplomatically, especially when your country is failing so hard at them.

The primary question about any conflict is how many innocent people are going to die in the process. You have whoever they attack, and then you have the North Koreans themselves, most of whom have absolutely nothing to do with anything the government says or does. So the military question for the US - and the world, really - is how to minimise civilian casualties and property damage. We certainly don't want bombs dropped on Seoul, even if it's the only move North Korea makes, and God knows we don't want a land war in Asia. Those never end well.

I think Kim Jong-Un is actually someone that might conceivably be receptive to diplomatic overtures, if they were undertaken with the right caution and he were accorded an undue quantity of respect. Basically we would need to pretend he's a lot bigger and badder than he is, feign a certain degree of fear, and propose a bunch of really beneficial results if he made changes in his regime. Unlike his father, for example, Jong-Un has at least expressed concern that his people never seem to have enough food.
39169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/26/17
Despite China's word to the contrary, it seems they are doing what they can to make North Korea's threat even more possible.

http://www.chinauncensored.tv/chinas-threat-south-korean-missile-defense/
39169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/26/17

MysticGon wrote:

The U.S. military has become experts at conventional war. Destroying an organized military has become an afterthought at this point. It's the nation-building they suck at.


We did well with Japan, Germany, and South Korea, but after that..... pfff...
28414 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 4/26/17

DeadlyOats wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

The U.S. military has become experts at conventional war. Destroying an organized military has become an afterthought at this point. It's the nation-building they suck at.


We did well with Japan, Germany, and South Korea, but after that..... pfff...


The U.S. had one of it's largest retreats in history in Korea courtesy of China.

It's not that their combat troops are better trained than anyone else's. It's just technologically the U.S. dismantles communications and basic infrastructure then blitzes the confused troops with overwhelming force.
26122 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / FL
Offline
Posted 4/26/17
fuck North Korea
39169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/26/17

MysticGon wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

The U.S. military has become experts at conventional war. Destroying an organized military has become an afterthought at this point. It's the nation-building they suck at.


We did well with Japan, Germany, and South Korea, but after that..... pfff...


The U.S. had one of it's largest retreats in history in Korea courtesy of China.

It's not that their combat troops are better trained than anyone else's. It's just technologically the U.S. dismantles communications and basic infrastructure then blitzes the confused troops with overwhelming force.


When I said we did well, I was thinking of nation building - after the wars ended (or ceased firing, in the case of the Korean War).
30264 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/26/17

MysticGon wrote:


DeadlyOats wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

The U.S. military has become experts at conventional war. Destroying an organized military has become an afterthought at this point. It's the nation-building they suck at.


We did well with Japan, Germany, and South Korea, but after that..... pfff...


The U.S. had one of it's largest retreats in history in Korea courtesy of China.

It's not that their combat troops are better trained than anyone else's. It's just technologically the U.S. dismantles communications and basic infrastructure then blitzes the confused troops with overwhelming force.


I do not think you are giving full consideration to what "well trained" means in the context of modern ground combatant forces. If you mean that US troops aren't any better at running and shooting and throwing grenades, then sure. However, that is a tiny, tiny part of what makes combat arms effective these days. Where the US soldier really shines is in their flexibility; the ability of the military command structure (as a whole) to rapidly evaluate a situation and respond to it more quickly than the opponent is based not so much on technological superiority or overwhelming force (the US actually doesn't have a particularly *large* army), but rather on the ability of each soldier to fill multiple roles as required. In most armies (excluding the better-trained western ones like UK, Australia, Germany, etc), individual soldiers have very limited skill sets. In the US, every rifleman knows how to operate the radios; in former WARPAC countries generally only dedicated radiomen do. In the US, every rifleman knows how to direct artillery fire; in former WARPAC countries, only dedicated forward observers (usually officers) know how (and if Russian soldier memoirs are anything to go by, they weren't particularly good at it; even in Ukraine it seems that Russian artillery requires a LONG pre-planning cycle, and is not immediately responsive like western artillery). The flexibility and initiative at the company-and-below level is what makes the US army so hard to beat, not just the fancy toys.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.