With how many problems they have providing basic services for their people how likely is it for their air force to actually stay in the air long enough to make a meaningful impact on any conflict even if they tried to project into SK? Fuel and maintenance requirements as well as being technologically outclassed all would suggest that when the NK's allocate their resources they might be better off just buying a lot of surface to air systems and more artillery, to me at least but then again what do I know...
North Korea goes full retard
- Thread starter Juvarisx
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
If NK did start to march into SK it would probably be something like their first push into SK but maybe not as successful.
We have superior technology but they have a lot more boots on the ground over there. They would of course get pushed back in time. Technology alone doesn't win wars and it takes time to move soldiers to Korea.
We have superior technology but they have a lot more boots on the ground over there. They would of course get pushed back in time. Technology alone doesn't win wars and it takes time to move soldiers to Korea.
Haast
Lord Nagafen Raider
- 3,281
- 1,636
TheNorth Korean Air Forceis ...not equipped to take on the US.
They have about 30 modern fighters and significantly more that are 1 or more generations old. Many of their older jets have to engage at visual range. We don't, so assume those will be immediately dispatched. Assuming we have at least 1 aircraft carrier in the area (an extremely safe assumption), we would have more modern fighters on that ship than they have total. We also have AFBs all over that area, including Japan, Okinawa and presumably South Korea. We just sent over F-22s, which are the most advanced fighters on the planet. Their AA hardware is dated, just like the rest of their equipment.
The tl;dr is their Air Force is old, pathetic and would be reduced to scrap really fucking fast.
They have about 30 modern fighters and significantly more that are 1 or more generations old. Many of their older jets have to engage at visual range. We don't, so assume those will be immediately dispatched. Assuming we have at least 1 aircraft carrier in the area (an extremely safe assumption), we would have more modern fighters on that ship than they have total. We also have AFBs all over that area, including Japan, Okinawa and presumably South Korea. We just sent over F-22s, which are the most advanced fighters on the planet. Their AA hardware is dated, just like the rest of their equipment.
The tl;dr is their Air Force is old, pathetic and would be reduced to scrap really fucking fast.
I'm not sure China would want to openly support North Korea in an invasion into South Korea (in this day and age), it might upset their international business interests too much.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,952
- 82,702
Yep.
I think their ability to support NK is contingent on how a conflict arises. If SK/US provokes it then China would have more of a defense if they participate, but if NK starts shelling SK again then their defense is ruined.
We could just wait for them to attack SK enough that China agrees to either help us or stay out of it, but the risk is like what was said above: If NK acquires competent nuclear capability the situation changes dramatically.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
If it ever came to it, I don't see why we couldn't conquer NK and then sede it to China.
I mean like literally pull our tech/troops out, Obama makes a trip to Bejing and says "We conquered this but really don't want this land. It's yours now. It belongs to you. :dealwithit:".
It's been generations, but we did that with Mexico.
Edit: The president could even be snide and present them with a bill for the bullets. To which the reply could be equally snide, i'm sure.
I mean like literally pull our tech/troops out, Obama makes a trip to Bejing and says "We conquered this but really don't want this land. It's yours now. It belongs to you. :dealwithit:".
It's been generations, but we did that with Mexico.
Edit: The president could even be snide and present them with a bill for the bullets. To which the reply could be equally snide, i'm sure.
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 12,574
- 22,149
I am really against war, without putting much thought into it I have been against just about every war we have been a part in with the exception of WW1 WW2 and our civil war. If someone wanted to bring up specific wars and ask why I don't agree with it ill explain and put some more thought into it. That being said, fuck NK, carpet bomb every single god damn city.
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 12,574
- 22,149
Would be a lot more expedient to make the trip before you conquer the country and schedule the military operation together as I'd imagine the bulk of NK's military is positioned for operations defending against the south or going south. Certainly there is no heavily mined DMZ and the like to worry about when you invade NK from China.
iannis
Musty Nester
- 31,351
- 17,657
Oh, i'm against an invasion of NK as it stands right now as well. I'm just imagining some provocation which is impossible to ignore -- like an attack on a US military installation or something. This kim jon un guy might be so deluded that he believes we will ignore -any- provocation. He wouldn't be the first despot of a "what country is that?" to make that exact mistake. In a case where we have no option BUT to go to War, I don't see that the exit strategy is all that complex. Not like Afghanistan/Iraq.
Stewart made the joke, but I'm pretty much in agreement with his analysis of how that war would go.
Stewart made the joke, but I'm pretty much in agreement with his analysis of how that war would go.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
The only way to stop them from activating their reactor again and making more weapons is going to be to bomb the reactor. Then the next move is NKs. If we aren't willing to do that, the bottom line is that NK can do what they want. No point in talking tough or sending over diplomats or increasing sanctions, those have been shown to be insufficient to deter them.
Also, talking about bombing NK cities is pretty crazytalk. This isn't total war, if you are actually advocating total war against NK, uggh.
Also, talking about bombing NK cities is pretty crazytalk. This isn't total war, if you are actually advocating total war against NK, uggh.
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 12,574
- 22,149
My stance is some what supported by evidence but also just my opinion. Lets compare Iran and NK who have been working on obtaining a nuclear weapon, Iran's population despite its leaders hatred for America is mostly positive. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon isn't the worst thing in the world, it seems more like a bargaining chip than anything else. Don't get me wrong I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, their leaders are the problem not the people and the people imo keep them in check to a certain extent.
North Korea is one big fucking cult, which their current leader was born and raised in. I honestly believe Kim has drunk the kool-aid his father was serving and believes the shit he was raised to believe just like the brain washed masses in NK. I believe that if they had a nuclear weapon they would nuke Seoul right now, I don't care how close it is to their country, look at their country and how they live now, you think a little radiation is going to effect that shit hole of a country?
Maybe I am completely misinformed, I am completely open to the fact that I could be wrong, this is just my feeling on the matter.
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 12,574
- 22,149
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,952
- 82,702
My response to this is the same:
1. How does this avoid deaths in Korea?
2. How does this help US interests?
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 12,574
- 22,149
1. North or South? I am all for peaceful solutions, hell if we could drone strike Kim Jong Un I would be all for that. The carpet bombing statement was more to save American Lives.
2. Pretty sure US interest would be greatly affected by Seoul becoming a nuclear stain on the planet. Blizzard alone would lose hundreds of millions.
The only thing I can see that would help US interests is maintaining the status quo. Military operations are ridiculously expensive, development aid to NK would be the same. On a more fun note Anonymous has now declared war on NK (http://bgr.com/2013/04/02/anonymous-...refare-410854/) allegedly which almost leads me to pray that a full-scale war gets going on account of this nonsense they are now pursuing.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 47,952
- 82,702
1. At this point what American lives are at risk?
2. Play out what happens when we start a carpet bombing campaign, and what any functional NK artillery systems and nuclear devices do as we start bombing NK.
The problem with the whole issue of invasion is that the cleanup will be a damn nightmare based on just what we know. God knows whats going on in that country the world doesn't see. At this point I don't think China even likes NK. They just don't want to deal with the refugees right after the regimes collapse, unfucking the country, and de-programming/re-programming the populace accordingly. To be blunt/heartless I'd prefer the US not spend money doing that right now either.
The only way Kim loses power is if he actually starts attacking people. If hes that dumb I doubt the Chinese step in to save him because at that point its cheaper for them to fix NK.
The only way Kim loses power is if he actually starts attacking people. If hes that dumb I doubt the Chinese step in to save him because at that point its cheaper for them to fix NK.