Are we going to have War in Korea soon..???

[Lycurgus]

Could we survive in a WWIII???

That's an interesting question. Historically, America has always bucked up and done the things necessary to win major conflicts but in those days we had a different breed of American. Being a 20 year Navy retired military service guy, it's bred into me to beat the drum loudly and wave the flag. That is my most natural instinct. I have a very deep love of country but we are a changed nation. Our young people are not the same caliber of young people we had back during WWII, Korea, and in the dark days of Viet Nam. Instead of a country of "us" we are now a country of "me". Attitudes of our young people are much different than back in those days. To clearly see evidence of this go to the mall and sit on a bench for an hour and watch and listen to what comes by. Lots of people don't even stand up or place their hand over their heart at ball games, before NASCAR races, when the flag passes by in a parade. In a lot of ways, we have become a sad lot. Our politicians in Washington don't have the same mentality as the politicians did back in the WWII days. Many have never been in the military and are completely clueless as to how to fight a war or what exactly is needed. Should the feces hit the fan, I believe we would be badly thrashed about the head and shoulders until we took a deep breath and got our act together. I hope it never comes to that. Could we win a WWIII? I'd have to say at this point it would be a 50/50 chance unless we used nuclear weapons. I hate to say this but because of what we have allowed to come of our financial status around the world, the value of the dollar, the size of our military, and various other reasons led me to believe we are dangerously close to becoming a Third World country instead of remaining the mighty power we once were.

Sadly I have to agree with you. Further when I say that I refer to the nation as a whole, not our men and women in uniform. For us to regain the national fire in the gut as we once had as a nation as a whole, I think it really takes tragedies like 9/11. National pride has been made something to be ashamed of instead of something to respect. Taking pride in ones nation does not mean that you are a war monger or a redneck.

We are fortunate to be one nation made up of many ethnic and cultural pasts. The new comer should be taught to embrace the values of this nation and her past. They should value the pride and sacrifice of others who made it possible for them to come here and have an opportunity at a better way of life.

Our own young people need to value these same things. Material things are wonderful, but, they have come with great sacrifice and they come from the foundation of our values of old. Our son just turned 12 years old and the best thing we did was put him in the Navy Sea Cadet program when he was 11. Yes he learns about war and battle, but, he also learns national pride, self respect, respect of others and how to give back and to do for others, without thinking of himself. Again, the values which made this nation a great one.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Not unless North Korea discovers oil, no.

look at dear leader's face! There is enough oil there to keep 10,000 escalades going for a year!


(I want to give your reputation a ding, just because what you said annoys me, but I will have to forebear because I have to admit the truth of it. We will have to settle for a virtual ding, ok?)

 

[Baruch Menachem]

I think the south Korean Army is a lot better and stronger than it was in the old days. South Korea is a functioning (badly, if you watch any Korean movies like I do, but quite well in the circumstances) democracy, and that always doubles the firepower of the troops.

If the Norks did invade, they would face a horrible disaster.

The real power of the Norks is their poison gas etc and missile capability. Seoul is 10 million people too close to the border to get to a shelter in time. So the North pretty much holds the civilian population of the south hostage until the shooting starts.

 

[Ravi]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

I admit to ignorance here, but I think the northern suburbs of Seoul are within artillery range of the truce line.

Given the paper forces of the Norks, you have to take them semi seriously. No one thinks they can be really effective, but they can do some very intense damage.

 

[Ravi]

I admit to ignorance here, but I think the northern suburbs of Seoul are within artillery range of the truce line.

Given the paper forces of the Norks, you have to take them semi seriously. No one thinks they can be really effective, but they can do some very intense damage.

To South Korea or some close target, sure. But to the US?

Saddam all over again with the added bonus that they know we aren't into entering into another war at the moment. They are just blowing smoke, imo.

 

[Valerie]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

 

[Ravi]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

 

[dilloduck]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

They certainly do have allies. Do you think they can even feed themselves ?

 

[Tech_Esq]

I think the south Korean Army is a lot better and stronger than it was in the old days. South Korea is a functioning (badly, if you watch any Korean movies like I do, but quite well in the circumstances) democracy, and that always doubles the firepower of the troops.

If the Norks did invade, they would face a horrible disaster.

The real power of the Norks is their poison gas etc and missile capability. Seoul is 10 million people too close to the border to get to a shelter in time. So the North pretty much holds the civilian population of the south hostage until the shooting starts.

Umm...when wasn't ROK tough? In Vietnam the Viet Cong feared the Tiger Brigade from Korea more than anyone else. When I trained with them in the '80's they were certainly a force to be reckoned with. ROK soldiers are put through the mill. Having the NKs just over the border keeps the threat real and the training focused.

I would not be sanguine about our chances of preventing the NKs from taking Seoul. They would be able to concentrate troops too much for us to be able to defend the whole line and defend Seoul. Our only hope would be air power. However, it's unlikely that we could achieve air dominance in time to save Seoul.

It might not be the Pusan perimeter version II, but it would not be any fun at all. We have enough troops to eventually stabilize the situation. We'd have to go all in. Call all the National Guard up, send in Okinawa based troops and Ft. Lewis. We have a lot of non-committed troops right now, but that's it. Everyone would be fighting for the duration. No more troop rotations etc. If China went in again, we'd just have to nuke them. We wouldn't really have a choice. It would be that or defeat. We might be able to convince them of our desperation level enough to keep them out of it. (Aside from the fact that it would be a convenient way to get out of paying out debts to them).

 

[Tech_Esq]

I admit to ignorance here, but I think the northern suburbs of Seoul are within artillery range of the truce line.

Given the paper forces of the Norks, you have to take them semi seriously. No one thinks they can be really effective, but they can do some very intense damage.

To South Korea or some close target, sure. But to the US?

Saddam all over again with the added bonus that they know we aren't into entering into another war at the moment. They are just blowing smoke, imo.

So you would ignore their threats, board their ship and frisk them for contraband?

Since they are just bluffing.

 

[Ravi]

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

They certainly do have allies. Do you think they can even feed themselves ?

Who?

 

[Tech_Esq]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

I'm not sure what you mean by "capability of harming us." We know they have set off 20 kton or better warheads. We know they have launched missiles that fly over 1,000 miles. Is your premise that they can't put the two together? You think or you bet? Have you ever been wrong?

 

[Ravi]

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

I'm not sure what you mean by "capability of harming us." We know they have set off 20 kton or better warheads. We know they have launched missiles that fly over 1,000 miles. Is your premise that they can't put the two together? You think or you bet? Have you ever been wrong?

Of course I've been wrong. This is my read of the situation. Very similar to Saddam. I'm not saying that they don't want to do it but they are incapable of doing it. Not to mention that one attack and they risk being wiped off the face of the earth with no one in the world much caring since they would have been the ones that started it.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

I'm not sure what you mean by "capability of harming us." We know they have set off 20 kton or better warheads. We know they have launched missiles that fly over 1,000 miles. Is your premise that they can't put the two together? You think or you bet? Have you ever been wrong?

Of course I've been wrong. This is my read of the situation. Very similar to Saddam. I'm not saying that they don't want to do it but they are incapable of doing it. Not to mention that one attack and they risk being wiped off the face of the earth with no one in the world much caring since they would have been the ones that started it.

Preliminarily, I have to disagree about this being "like Saddam," we know the NKs have nukes, they've tested them already, twice. The NKs have advanced missile technology to provide theater if not ICBM capabilities. Saddam had neither of these. If he did, there would have been no issue going to Iraq.

You have to look at the other thread on this topic, but it really comes down to this:

The easy question is what if NK successfully attacks us. But, that isn't likely to happen. The harder question is NK is firing missiles at Hawaii. What if they hit it? What if they would have hit it, but we shoot it down? At what point does punching the US become an act of war?

 

[Ravi]

I'm not sure what you mean by "capability of harming us." We know they have set off 20 kton or better warheads. We know they have launched missiles that fly over 1,000 miles. Is your premise that they can't put the two together? You think or you bet? Have you ever been wrong?

Of course I've been wrong. This is my read of the situation. Very similar to Saddam. I'm not saying that they don't want to do it but they are incapable of doing it. Not to mention that one attack and they risk being wiped off the face of the earth with no one in the world much caring since they would have been the ones that started it.

Preliminarily, I have to disagree about this being "like Saddam," we know the NKs have nukes, they've tested them already, twice. The NKs have advanced missile technology to provide theater if not ICBM capabilities. Saddam had neither of these. If he did, there would have been no issue going to Iraq.

You have to look at the other thread on this topic, but it really comes down to this:

The easy question is what if NK successfully attacks us. But, that isn't likely to happen. The harder question is NK is firing missiles at Hawaii. What if they hit it? What if they would have hit it, but we shoot it down? At what point does punching the US become an act of war?

As soon as they launch a missle at us, even if they don't hit us. But since they won't be able to hit us then they can pretend they did not try.

The guy is trying to look like something more than a jumped up dictator. But that is all he is and will remain unless he cultivates some powerful allies. Which isn't going to happen.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Of course I've been wrong. This is my read of the situation. Very similar to Saddam. I'm not saying that they don't want to do it but they are incapable of doing it. Not to mention that one attack and they risk being wiped off the face of the earth with no one in the world much caring since they would have been the ones that started it.

Preliminarily, I have to disagree about this being "like Saddam," we know the NKs have nukes, they've tested them already, twice. The NKs have advanced missile technology to provide theater if not ICBM capabilities. Saddam had neither of these. If he did, there would have been no issue going to Iraq.

You have to look at the other thread on this topic, but it really comes down to this:

The easy question is what if NK successfully attacks us. But, that isn't likely to happen. The harder question is NK is firing missiles at Hawaii. What if they hit it? What if they would have hit it, but we shoot it down? At what point does punching the US become an act of war?

As soon as they launch a missle at us, even if they don't hit us. But since they won't be able to hit us then they can pretend they did not try.

The guy is trying to look like something more than a jumped up dictator. But that is all he is and will remain unless he cultivates some powerful allies. Which isn't going to happen.

Well, remember, they don't have to get it to Hawaii, we have a very substantial base in Okinawa. That's a lot closer. I'm not positive that they can't hit us. Missile technology is kinda finicky. If you recall how stupid our initial attempts at creating ICBMs were. We looked like idiots for a few years, until we didn't. Just exactly when that will be for them is unknown, except we know they are pretty close. And, distance is one thing, accuracy another. The Soviets never had an accurate missile. They made up for that fact by putting larger yielding bombs on top of them.

I'm I missing something, why do you think NK is not an ally of China?

They certainly supply several countries in the Middle East with technology including Iran. While not too strong, it would be very inconvenient for us if the Iranians decided to cut the straits of hormuz while we tried to fight a war with NK, no?

 

[Ravi]

China would drop NK like a hot potato if they declared war on the US. Their alliance isn't very solid, and mostly used by the Chinese to keep refugees from crossing the border into China.

I can't imagine NK and Iran forming an alliance.

No offense, but weren't you one of the ones worried about Georgia? How'd that work out.

 

[Valerie]

It surprises me that anyone takes North Korea's bluffing seriously.

Oh come on, how could we not take nukes in the hands of mad men "seriously"? They're testing us and taunting us and the consequences could indeed be quite serious.

Is that you Baghdad Bob?

I don't think they have the capability of harming the US and they also have no allies.

Very funny!

I voted no, but that doesn't mean NK "shouldn't to be taken seriously".

 

[editec]

As much as we know that we could put a whoopin on their Military in a conventional way....and the fact that the people are all but defeated to begin with...how would we address the fact that they are a nuclear threat??? All be it a small one...but a threat none the less.

Anyone think if North Korea were invaded, they might shoot a missile at Japan?

They might.

Then I suspect Japan would kick their fascist asses into Siberia.