US to conduct naval exercises with SK do too attack. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=bravehat;22151942]Keep telling yourself that you'll dominate north korea. I mean it's not like they have one of the largest standing armies in the world and pump 25% of their entire funding into their army. :rolleye: EDIT: Also you mean strategic not tactical :eng101:[/QUOTE] The US spends over 600 Billion on its military every year, that is probably more then what North Korea is worth in total. The US would roll over NK like Korean Starcraft player over me(I suck).

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170]As soon as war breaks out, if it does, South Korea will be wiped off the map, but shortly after so will North Korea. The only hope NK has of surviving is getting a superpower like China to help them. They are both communist (well, they claim they are), but China hates NK, and vice-versa. [editline]05:48PM[/editline] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] Once again, you don't understand the nature of modern war, at all. Stop posting about it.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170]As soon as war breaks out, if it does, South Korea will be wiped off the map, but shortly after so will North Korea. The only hope NK has of surviving is getting a superpower like China to help them. They are both communist (well, they claim they are), but China hates NK, and vice-versa. [editline]05:48PM[/editline] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0[/media] this video is applicable to you, and the illogical fallacies you have posted in this thread.

[QUOTE=Duecez;22150943]Shits about to go down[/QUOTE] If I see that comment one more time...

Just to all the people that are saying just go ahead and start this war you must remember. NK has multiple nuclear war heads, they could easily send one straight towards Seoul. We don't want that now do we?

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170]As soon as war breaks out, if it does, South Korea will be wiped off the map, but shortly after so will North Korea. The only hope NK has of surviving is getting a superpower like China to help them. They are both communist (well, they claim they are), but China hates NK, and vice-versa. [editline]05:48PM[/editline] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] The US specializes in actual warfare, the insurgency issue is different because it's unconventional.

[QUOTE=Nyaos;22152644]If I see that comment one more time...[/QUOTE] Shit will go down? :smug:

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22151022]My bet is by next week war will start.[/QUOTE] Actually, we're not like Israel. We don't start a war over an itchy trigger finger. We try to prevent wars before they start.

It's fun how we're just watching North Korea continue to develop nuclear weapons (supposedly) while we're doing nothing I'd say invade the shit outta them already

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170]As soon as war breaks out, if it does, South Korea will be wiped off the map, but shortly after so will North Korea. The only hope NK has of surviving is getting a superpower like China to help them. They are both communist (well, they claim they are), but China hates NK, and vice-versa. [editline]05:48PM[/editline] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] Your logic is astounding.

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;22152853]Actually, we're not like Israel. We don't start a war over the slightest provocation.[/QUOTE] If a slight provocation is a torpedo attack on a naval ship killing 46 sailors, I'd hate to see what a conflict of interest would be.

[QUOTE=Kill001;22152865]It's fun how we're just watching North Korea continue to develop nuclear weapons (supposedly) while we're doing nothing I'd say invade the shit outta them already[/QUOTE] Thousands of American lives Billions of dollars Millions of north korean refugees streaming into China and SK, causing huge economic damage All for some nukes that NK will never use?

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] In more ways than one, a guerrilla army is much harder to combat than a conventional army, IE Desert Storm vs Iraq war. Not to mention the fact that the US military is based around fighting a conventional army.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170]As soon as war breaks out, if it does, South Korea will be wiped off the map, but shortly after so will North Korea. The only hope NK has of surviving is getting a superpower like China to help them. They are both communist (well, they claim they are), but China hates NK, and vice-versa. [editline]05:48PM[/editline] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] Defeating insurgences is harder then fighting a uniformed army. North Korea has a uniformed army, it be harder to take down, but we wouldn't have the problem in iraq and Afghanistan.

[QUOTE=evilweazel;22153330]In more ways than one, a guerrilla army is much harder to combat than a conventional army, IE Desert Storm vs Iraq war. Not to mention the fact that the US military is based around fighting a conventional army.[/QUOTE] Actually, the US military is geared towards the low-intensity conflict-minded "full spectrum operations" rather than fighting an equal conventional enemy back in the Cold War. Nevertheless, as one recent Army field manual says about FSO, it "will take us into the 21st century urban battlefields among the`people without losing our capabilities to dominate the higher conventional end of the spectrum of conflict."

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;22152853]Actually, we're not like Israel. We don't start a war over an itchy trigger finger. We try to prevent wars before they start.[/QUOTE] Or at least we say that.

fuck north korea

US to conduct naval exercises with [i]SKI DO[/i] too attack.

[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22152170] The US can't even defeat guerrillas and insurgents, even with waves of allied help. Taking down North Korea, a nation which possesses a professional army, will be near-impossible, without taking extremely heavy losses.[/QUOTE] The only reason we can't take down guerillas is because they use guerilla warfare. There is no enemy to defeat. There's no standing army. It's just scattered villagers that are insurgents. US versus a standing army like North Korea, NK = dead. C'mon now, it's not that hard.

Kind of hard to fight a fuckin' loon with no rational thought that is willing to use their own children as human shield, especially when our Rules of Engagement are centered around preventing civilian casualties. So you got a Civilian one second, the next he pulls an AK from under his little dress (Because he's disguised as a woman) then runs behind the crowd or holds his kid up in front of him as he backs out You can't fight that really... But I bet if you stacked up Coalition casualties vs Insurgent casualties.... It's going to be severely one sided still Eventually we'll pull out and it'll be ultimately due to cost. And it costs nothing but a cab fare for some brainwashed idiot foreign fighter

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;22152853]Actually, we're not like Israel. We don't start a war over an itchy trigger finger.[/QUOTE] When you realize they're surrounded by people that essentially hate them for who they are, then maybe you'll agree with me that initiating a war because of basically constant bombings from people who happen to be holed up in said surrouding countries is somewhat reasonable. I'm going to laugh if you even mention civilians. You don't understand warfare at all. [QUOTE]We try to prevent wars before they start.[/QUOTE] So does the UN, but I could list a few examples of outright failure on their part. North Korea is even [I]more[/I] belligerant than Iran. They [I]want[/I] to provoke you...diplomacy doesn't really solve the issue. In this case, it's just delaying a conflict that's inevitable (unless there's a major leadership change or revolt before then). Unrelated, but I happened to notice your avatar. Do you even know who that is, or what he was for?

[QUOTE=Duecez;22150943]Shits about to go down[/QUOTE] That's what everyone always says. But does anything ever happen?

[QUOTE=Acesarge;22152402]The US spends over 600 Billion on its military every year, that is probably more then what North Korea is worth in total. The US would roll over NK like Korean Starcraft player over me(I suck).[/QUOTE] war isn't all about capital

Why is this year so shitty Two wars, perhaps a third on the horizon, the sea is filled with oil, the sky is filled with ash, and justin bieber

If a war does happen, Seoul is most likely going to be devastated from artillery barrages and the only way I see to stop that is to try to attack the NK artillery with naval bombardments.

War will happen when you least expect it

Thank god I live in Florida, a pretty unimportant state, so it's probably the last to go down if nukes hit.

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;22152853]Actually, we're not like Israel. We don't start a war over an itchy trigger finger. We try to prevent wars before they start.[/QUOTE] What I meant was that NK will attack.

I still doubt anything will happen. But i'll wait and see, who knows.

The last country I would think of going to war with is korea. Came out of nowhere.