Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aqizzar]

There's an awful lot of bullshit flying around in this thread.

I am by no means an expert, but is it not possible China would siphon weapons to the potential North Korean guerilla group?

Or like so many other militaristic dictatorships before them, the North Korean military hands a rifle or some revenge weapon to every man, woman, and child, since God knows they have enough of them laying around.

[SIGVARDR]

My opinion has been stated.You want to pick apart my posts,go ahead,But I'm done with this thread.

[Phmcw]

Three war at once for America?
During a world wide economy crisis?
Well, the future look bright my friends.

[Dwarf]

There's an awful lot of bullshit flying around in this thread.

I am by no means an expert, but is it not possible China would siphon weapons to the potential North Korean guerilla group?

Or like so many other militaristic dictatorships before them, the North Korean military hands a rifle or some revenge weapon to every man, woman, and child, since God knows they have enough of them laying around.

Now that you speak of it...
True, true.

Now, I ask myself how effective the NK militia would be. Given that most of the people there have been born and lived under the brainwashing - and consequential worship - of their leader, I'd expect them to be one of the most extreme militias in the world, if not the best equipped.

[RedWarrior0]

The US has this industry called "Weaponry". It's really successful during wartime, you know?

Anyways, to stop the  artillery pointed at Seoul, we'd basically need to literally glass the mountains. With enough napalm, the heat would be ridiculous. Plasmafied Hydrogen would be very, very hot (Somewhat an understatement), and it could probably melt some of the protection, and enough time might actually render them useless.

Actually, getting some iridium rods in orbit and dropping them in the mountains would be an effective superweapon. Long enough and look! no more artillery! Collateral damage would be huge, though.

[Grakelin]

Lots of this thread seems to be people with no knowledge of military history or current events wanking over how awesome the American military is while debasing actual soldiers (SIGVARDR is a soldier IRL, right?) when they come and say "no, no, that's not how it works at all". This is like the scene in Regeneration where Siegfried Sassoon is listening to the old dudes ramble on and thinking about how stupid they are.

Why do people seem to think that Guerilla Warfare isn't effective? Guerilla Warfare won the Vietnam war for the Vietnamese. Guerilla Warfare won Cuba and various other Southern American countries. Guerilla Warfare has kept the Americans held up in the Middle East for nearly ten years. You just don't get it. A war with North Korea isn't going to be any more cut and dry then the war in Iraq or the war in Afghanistan.

Do you guys even realize that the Kandahar base is barraged by missile fire every day? This isn't Call of Duty. You don't just pinpoint the enemy, swoop in, and win the day. This is actually real. People die. On both sides. Only an idiot sits back in his chair and thinks "But we're so awesome we got jets and shit" before amassing soldiers from an already-stretched thin military and sending them to attack the fifth largest army in the world, which is actually only about a hundred thousand people smaller than your full force and are in their home element.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Redwarrior suggesting protecting Seoul by dropping immense levels of napalm on a Korean mountain chain. Are you... you're joking, right?

[Jackrabbit]

Collateral damage would be huge, though.

I think this is important, considering Guerrilla warfare in part relies on the helpfulness of the surrounding populace, who are more likely to support them if an invading superpower drops an unholy amount of napalm and irradiated rods on a mountain chain.

[HAMMERMILL]

I was in the US Army for 5 years, which really doesn't mean much when talking about hypothetical wars that will probably never occur.

First of all, nobody uses napalm anymore. I don't know why everyone is hellbent on this idea of using napalm to counter military obstacles guns, bombs and missiles are far better at dealing with. Secondly, a new Korean War would be primary fought by South Korea and their massive, well equipped military, the USA and the UN would be secondary considerations.

[Aqizzar]

Which brings the thread back to where I came in - South Korea does not want to fight a war with North Korea, and certainly doesn't want to be responsible for the aftermath.  And because no one else wants to fight another war on the South's behalf, and the military inner circle around Kim Jong Il will never allow the DPRK to actually start a war because they know they'd be annihilated, it's just not going to happen.

[Sensei]

Not to mention the Geneva convention.

I think some people have just been playing too much DF.

[RedWarrior0]

I was sort of joking with the mass napalm and Iridium (Not irradiated) Rods from God. Though I can't see any way to really get NK's artillery away from aimed at Seoul.

Aqizzar: Truth.
Sensei: Truth.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

Why do people seem to think that Guerilla Warfare isn't effective? Guerilla Warfare won the Vietnam war for the Vietnamese.

The US getting sick of the war and deciding to stop fighting it won the war for the North Vietnamese (who, it should be noted, were a sovereign nation backed by a major power, with no short supply of expendable troops).

Guerilla Warfare won Cuba and various other Southern American countries.

Militant movements backed by foreign powers knocked over two-bit dictators. Not nearly as romantic as it's played out to be.

Guerilla Warfare has kept the Americans held up in the Middle East for nearly ten years.

And it's not winning. It's surviving, but it isn't, and can't, win. We're occupying territory to prop up friendly governments until they can build up enough of a military to hold themselves up against the irregular militias, as well as to have a staging ground for targeting those militias (since, after all, they don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of dislodging US troops from the countries, but they could make things hell for a weak government with a half-assed military).

You just don't get it. A war with North Korea isn't going to be any more cut and dry then the war in Iraq or the war in Afghanistan.

You mean it will be a fell swoop followed by a protracted campaign of occupation to stop the ousted government from reclaiming power in the vacuum left by its removal/patchwork militias turning it into the next somalia? I assume the US would provide the fell swoop, and SK the military occupation, which would probably work quite a bit better given they speak the same language, and NK isn't as fragmented as the middle east.

Do you guys even realize that the Kandahar base is barraged by missile fire every day? This isn't Call of Duty. You don't just pinpoint the enemy, swoop in, and win the day. This is actually real. People die. On both sides. Only an idiot sits back in his chair and thinks "But we're so awesome we got jets and shit" before amassing soldiers from an already-stretched thin military and sending them to attack the fifth largest army in the world, which is actually only about a hundred thousand people smaller than your full force and are in their home element.

The US strategy of air superiority is specifically to cripple an opposed conventional army. Which it does extremely well. Now, that does jack shit when your enemy is a pack of untrained kids with thirty year old AK-47s hiding in the middle of a slum, but it tears the living fuck out of the things you really need to worry about on a strategic scale, namely armor, transportation, lines of supply and communication, airfields, and fortified positions. You take those away, and that's one million fragmented, unsupported soldiers with nothing bigger than a tree to hide behind, against a coordinated, comparably sized army (assuming SK does the legwork), supported with armor, transport, and supply lines. And that's ignoring the potential impact of psyops before the actual invasion takes...

[Aqizzar]

If it were that easy for an occupying power to shut down a guerrilla war, wouldn't it happen all the time, instead of virtually never?  You might want to put down your Jane's Awesome Weapons book and look for the commonalities in occupied territories, and why occupational wars just don't win.  Sure, big air power bitchslap that blows up all the tanks, whatever.  How many times are we going to have to watch this play out again, before it's understood that the opening attack is not the whole war.

[HAMMERMILL]

Which brings the thread back to where I came in - South Korea does not want to fight a war with North Korea, and certainly doesn't want to be responsible for the aftermath.  And because no one else wants to fight another war on the South's behalf, and the military inner circle around Kim Jong Il will never allow the DPRK to actually start a war because they know they'd be annihilated, it's just not going to happen.

This man is correct and you should listen to him.

The west is basically just waiting untill NK implodes on itself, which is what they have been hoping would happen for the last 50 years. The north could never annex the south because they could never win the war and the south has nothing to gain and everything to lose with a war. They would be burdened with holding the border to prevent the mass depopulation of North Korea escaping the impoded economy of the north to look for work in the south.

[zchris13]

Amen.  It goes down like this:
North Korea overreaches, and does something that sparks major action by somebody.  This offended party gets all of their friends to come fight, and depending on if NK pissed off, say, Iran, or provoked SK to all out war, then either:

A.The massed forces of all the good guys kick ass, North Korea sort of crumbles, South Korea fights a long and bitter war against what is left of NK.  SK doesn't really want to be in this position, and what it will entail, so they avoid this path as much as they possibly can.
B. I'm not really sure what will happen if the Middle East decides that NK is a pain.

Meanwhile:
China gives some token relief to NK, then sort of has nothing more to do with it for the rest of ever.  They want to keep exporting cheap shitty goods to the US, not conquer the world.  (although you'd never know by the way people talk about it).

Either way, it will be painful and bloody, all over the place.  And please stop overanalysing it.  We can't really know how it will work out until it does.

@guerrilla warfare: the chin is right.  Guerrilla warfare works wonders when you have nothing left to lose except for your life, but it doesn't win wars.  Although the occupational nation will have a hella time of it, for the rest of forever, so you can't say that the guerrillas lost either.