Jump to content

North Korea

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Except that Japan had better hardware, and better trained troops initially than the US... NK has much worse hardware, and comparatively almost untrained troops.

 

The average American soldier had better equipment than their Japanese counterparts (US soldier has a Thompson, Japanese soldier has an Arisaka rifle (bolt action rifle)), not to mention better tanks, planes, and ships (well, over time). From what I know though, NK has a heavily trained force ready to defend their country with chemical and nuclear weapons. Which begs a question, why doesn't NK give their WMD to terrorists? Even if the US traces the weapon back to NK, they could claim it was stolen form them.

Share this post


Link to post

That was only the latter parts of the war. For the first year or so we were way outmatched until our numbers managed to get rid of their better trained soldiers, and much of their better equipment. (they just couldn't keep up production and quality at the same time)

 

As for NK's "heavily trained" force, that just means that they beat up a few more people that were trying to cross the border than the average Joe... A single SEAL team could easily wipe out their entire defense force in a week, and the NK government wouldn't even know about it if that's what was wanted. Chemical weapons are easy to protect an invading force against... Chemsuits are fairly cheap, and very effective now. Nukes would hurt them more than us, so I doubt they'll actually use them. (they're nuts, but not psychotic)

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
That was only the latter parts of the war. For the first year or so we were way outmatched until our numbers managed to get rid of their better trained soldiers, and much of their better equipment. (they just couldn't keep up production and quality at the same time)

 

As for NK's "heavily trained" force, that just means that they beat up a few more people that were trying to cross the border than the average Joe... A single SEAL team could easily wipe out their entire defense force in a week, and the NK government wouldn't even know about it if that's what was wanted. Chemical weapons are easy to protect an invading force against... Chemsuits are fairly cheap, and very effective now. Nukes would hurt them more than us, so I doubt they'll actually use them. (they're nuts, but not psychotic)

 

If they detonated the nuke after the battle, it would cause significant damage to their enemies, as when their country is invaded, they know the will not win and will surely be wiped out. And as for your claim of Navy Seal forces being able to take out their army, it is downright impossible, period.

Share this post


Link to post

You have no idea... I know SEALs... They can, if they are told to. NK is an easy target compared to some of the stuff they're used to.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
You have no idea... I know SEALs... They can, if they are told to. NK is an easy target compared to some of the stuff they're used to.

 

All I have to say to that is bullshit. That's what it is, bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post

Believe what you want. I can't provide you with actual missions the SEALs I know have been on, (classified info for another 14-24 years) but my statement is not fiction or exaggeration.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Believe what you want. I can't provide you with actual missions the SEALs I know have been on, (classified info for another 14-24 years) but my statement is not fiction or exaggeration.

 

I take this means you're burying the hatchet for about 20 years. Anyway, I recently found out that if the Pacific front lasted a few more weeks, the Soviet Union would have leaped on Hokkaido (northernmost of the Japanese home islands), created their own NK style government there. This could have affected the Cold War drastically, even effecting the outcome of the Korean War. I would like to hear your opinion on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post

If they had attacked Japan directly, we probly would've left the cold war, and it would've been a regular war. (except with nukes to back everyone up)

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
If they had attacked Japan directly, we probly would've left the cold war, and it would've been a regular war. (except with nukes to back everyone up)

 

And you drew this conclusion how? The Soviets were following the terms set by the Yalta and Postdam conferences, so politically, they were just acting how they should have.

Share this post


Link to post

A single SEAL team, take out NK...roflmao. Nukes backing everyone up in a world where the Soviets won't have them for 4 years yet...lmfao.

 

I have to ask, because this is reminding me SO MUCH of this guy I used to know...

 

Did you spend college telling people you were authorized by the Civil Air Patrol to shoot people in the knees to keep them from leaving the scene of an aircraft crash?

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post

No... Makes no sense to keep someone in a wrecked plane unless it'd kill them to move them. Keeping people out is a concern tough, and C.A.P. teaches to get in the way as much as possible without assaulting someone. (who the fuck carries a gun on a S&R mission, just to shoot someone?)

 

I didn't say a singe SEAL team could take out all of NK, I said they could take out all the main defenses in approximately 1 week. As for them not having nukes... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project They had them at the end of WWII. We are talking Cold War, not pre-Cold War.

 

If they had attacked Japan directly, we probly would've left the cold war, and it would've been a regular war. (except with nukes to back everyone up)

 

And you drew this conclusion how? The Soviets were following the terms set by the Yalta and Postdam conferences, so politically, they were just acting how they should have.

Just one of the many topics that has come up in conversations with people that were in the DoD back then... That was their universal answer. (over a dozen people said almost the exact same thing)

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
No... Makes no sense to keep someone in a wrecked plane unless it'd kill them to move them. Keeping people out is a concern tough, and C.A.P. teaches to get in the way as much as possible without assaulting someone. (who the fuck carries a gun on a S&R mission, just to shoot someone?)

 

I didn't say a singe SEAL team could take out all of NK, I said they could take out all the main defenses in approximately 1 week. As for them not having nukes... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_atomic_bomb_project They had them at the end of WWII. We are talking Cold War, not pre-Cold War.

 

If they had attacked Japan directly, we probly would've left the cold war, and it would've been a regular war. (except with nukes to back everyone up)

 

And you drew this conclusion how? The Soviets were following the terms set by the Yalta and Postdam conferences, so politically, they were just acting how they should have.

Just one of the many topics that has come up in conversations with people that were in the DoD back then... That was their universal answer. (over a dozen people said almost the exact same thing)

 

Well, to clear up any confusion, I meant that what if the Soviets took Hokkaido DURING World War 2. Anyway, I had no clue you meant large numbers of Seal teams taking down NK. I agree a large enough force would overwhelm NK, but they would take a fair amount of casualties in the process.

Share this post


Link to post

Ah, during WWII is an entirely different story... Then it would most likely have been that Japan would've fallen completely under Russian control, and the USA wouldn't've even dropped a nuke there. We also probly would've been in a world of hurt for the Cold War, but it wouldn't've resulted in a different outcome I think.

Don't insult me. I have trained professionals to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Ah, during WWII is an entirely different story... Then it would most likely have been that Japan would've fallen completely under Russian control, and the USA wouldn't've even dropped a nuke there. We also probly would've been in a world of hurt for the Cold War, but it wouldn't've resulted in a different outcome I think.

 

The Red Army went fast toward Japan, but not THAT fast. Anyway, I heard SK might pursue their own nuclear program, which might cause a nuclear arms race and nuclear war that would destroy the Korean Peninsula. The main reason we can't invade NK is that it could cause a large casualty rate (US is an exeption, but the bullshit media sees it as a horrible tragedy (boo-hoo, a few thousand people died)) and devastate NK like Iraq (+or- an insurgency) with horrible unemployment and (temporary) famine, anarchy, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
media sees it as a horrible tragedy (boo-hoo, a few thousand people died)

 

I'm sure you would also find it a bloody big tragedy, were you to be one of the few thousand...

 

Anyway, in the Soviet Union it was common to think that we were just a couple of days away from the invasion of Japan when the US dropped the bombs and that the US have done that specifically to preempt Stalin from hitting Japan and showing the US "how it's done!" :-) You see - every nation likes to brag about victories they woulda, coulda, shoulda have won if not for this or that....

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
media sees it as a horrible tragedy (boo-hoo, a few thousand people died)

 

I'm sure you would also find it a bloody big tragedy, were you to be one of the few thousand...

 

 

Not really. I would mourn my loss and get over it. You need to make sacrifices in war.

Share this post


Link to post
media sees it as a horrible tragedy (boo-hoo, a few thousand people died)

 

I'm sure you would also find it a bloody big tragedy, were you to be one of the few thousand...

 

Anyway, in the Soviet Union it was common to think that we were just a couple of days away from the invasion of Japan when the US dropped the bombs and that the US have done that specifically to preempt Stalin from hitting Japan and showing the US "how it's done!" :-) You see - every nation likes to brag about victories they woulda, coulda, shoulda have won if not for this or that....

 

Regards

 

 

But the USSR was only a few days from invading Japan. If it was for America there would have been a major landgrab.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Not really. I would mourn my loss and get over it. You need to make sacrifices in war.

 

Past me is a cold, brutal, and idiotic sociopath. I wonder what's new.

 

Oh, this: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/eee56d9a70b446ac858b24c887943488/seoul-n-korea-send-no-2-rare-visit-south

 

This is coming after Kim Jr. was reported as suffering from health issues and cancelled all public appearances. Might have been a coup.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-29489134

 

I hope that this will lead to reunification.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.