The US will lose in a war against North Korea, a former Pentagon commander warns

[rightwinger]

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

Sure, I have no doubt that we would locate and destroy their thousands of artillery pieces at a very nice rate.


Possibly effectively ending it in a matter of weeks, maybe even days.


The death toll might only be in the tens of thousands.

Easily tens of thousands
Our retaliation would kill hundreds of thousands

Which makes up for the dead not at all.

That is the point
Neither side wants the casualties and is content with a stand-off
It has worked for 65 years

Only Trump insists on poking Leedle Rocket Man with a stick

Hey, it was your side screaming for more aggressive foreign policy, not mine, and especially not me.



I asked libs why they wanted more action from some one they claimed they considered incompetent, but got no real answer.

I was happy just ignoring the rants of North Korea, just like we always have

It is Trump who can't just let it go

 

[harmonica]

Wow, we have highly qualified arm chair military geniuses right here on USMB, who don't need the any experience or the on ground intelligence of planning any scenarios of attempting of invading North Korea.
But Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas has.
"From January 2012 to 2014, Jouas was intimately involved in formulating plans to counter a North Korean attack on South Korea. "This threat was the most dangerous I’d faced since the end of the Cold War, and planning for it the most challenging problem I’d encountered in my 35-year career," he said."
We might not lose the war, but the causalities, would number in the tens of millions (which would include tens of thousands of American troops and citizens. and that's just on the Korean peninsula. NK could nuke Japan and other Asian targets.
When I see arm chair generals with absolutely zero experience in planning military actions, criticizing a general who was in charge of the military in Korea, it's clear to these fools are complete idiots.
Un-fucking believable.

the general is the dumbass

He said it would take "days" to eliminate North Korean artillery, rockets and missiles that threaten the South Korean capital of Seoul, which is home to 25 million people.

if they are using arty/rockets, and missiles on Seoul, that means the SK and US forces will move and destroy the NK military faster---get it???!!!???
he says they are going to use their military might against Seoul instead of the attacking military force???
yeah--he's a smart guy

you know I see this crap in other forums.......you think the US and SK will be like snowmen--just sitting there doing nothing

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

It won't be quick enough to stop NK from flattening Seoul first.

The artillery would be neutralized quick, and from what I read the flattening of Seoul just isn't possible

Its worse than you probably think. This is a good article about NKs artillery and its threat against Seoul.

North Korea's Simple But Deadly Artillery Holds Seoul And U.S. Hostage

arty will not win wars.....arty firing at civilians/cities doesn't help beat the opposing military forces and does not greatly panic civilians/cause the country to surrender/etc as clearly seen in WW2

German and Japanese cities were demolished---with bombs--which are much, much more powerful than arty and they lived through it....many dead, but arty is much less powerful.....it takes a looooong time and many, many rounds just to demolish one building--unless they are at point blank range aiming for the main structural areas of the building
----arty is not a game winner

and you don't think SK and the US has thought about this?

 

[Old Rocks]

lock this unpatriotic person up!

The U.S. could lose in a war against North Korea, a former Pentagon commander warns

No, we would not 'lose' a war with North Korea. But the cost to all would be so high that there really would be no winners. One NK nuke on a Japanese nuclear plant, and the cost to the whole world would be extroidinary.

 

[dannyboys]

Wow, we have highly qualified arm chair military geniuses right here on USMB, who don't need the any experience or the on ground intelligence of planning any scenarios of attempting of invading North Korea.
But Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas has.
"From January 2012 to 2014, Jouas was intimately involved in formulating plans to counter a North Korean attack on South Korea. "This threat was the most dangerous I’d faced since the end of the Cold War, and planning for it the most challenging problem I’d encountered in my 35-year career," he said."
We might not lose the war, but the causalities, would number in the tens of millions (which would include tens of thousands of American troops and citizens. and that's just on the Korean peninsula. NK could nuke Japan and other Asian targets.
When I see arm chair generals with absolutely zero experience in planning military actions, criticizing a general who was in charge of the military in Korea, it's clear to these fools are complete idiots.
Un-fucking believable.

hey smart guy--if you actually read and understood my post, I said that what the General says is '''possible'''
usually these articles [ MSM ] exaggerate/leave out important info to get readership

''tens of millions''?? sure, with a nuke war--but not a conventional war..the US had 400,000 deaths in all of WW2
duh duh--yes with a nuke war, it would be a problem--this is a no-brainer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

in a conventional war, no so much
air is much more deadly than it was even in 1965
for the NK conventional attack to be successful, ALL the NK services have to:
1. be efficient in their specialty--armor/infantry/logistics/air/AA
2. work together as a combined arms military
----the AA has to be able to deal with the SK/US air--which I highly doubt they could--as we see in the Iraq war their air was worthless--this is right after Iraq got a lot of experience and training in the Iran-Iraq war
--Korea much smaller land mass than Iraq---water surrounds Korea---US carriers can cover more of the country easier than they did in Iraq
.....carriers and the Air Force can hit not only NK forces in the south easier, they can also hit NK easier than hitting forces n Iraq---much more refueling needed there

the Iraqis had great, much experience -- and you see they failed miserably

air power is a major factor--as in the Korean War and the Persian Gulf wars---and US air has shown many times it's efficiency/professionalism/etc

First of all, I find very humorous that you think you know more than a general, who oversaw and studied different scenarios, using high level intelligence, that you a zero access to.
Secondly, it's a given that if North Korea was invaded, they would let loose their nuclear arsenal. That would insure that the tens of million. Seoul has 25 million people living in the city, NK has allegedly nukes pointed at Japan also. And then there's the citizens of NK.
Back during the Korean War, when nukes didn't come into play, about 5 million people died.
===================================
"The Korean War was relatively short but exceptionally bloody. Nearly 5 million people died. More than half of these–about 10 percent of Korea’s prewar population–were civilians. (This rate of civilian casualties was higher than World War II’s and Vietnam’s.) Almost 40,000 Americans died in action in Korea, and more than 100,000 were wounded."
Korean War - Facts & Summary - HISTORY.com
==================================
Obviously, with nukes in play, the death toll will make the Korean War look like child play

The Pervert doesn't have a "nuclear arsenal" you MORON!
The Pervert 'claims' to have about sixty "nuclear bombs" but he can't deliver them.
He's shit scared of actually testing an ICBM with an actual nuclear bomb attached for fear of blowing himself up when the missile explodes on the launch pad.
His 'rocket launchers are the type that can only fire once and then they are scrap metal.

 

[Old Rocks]

And NK hits one Japanese nuclear power plant and all of that is irrelevant.

 

[tigerred59]

lock this unpatriotic person up!

The U.S. could lose in a war against North Korea, a former Pentagon commander warns

Really? Reality TV president who was afraid to got war when called upon vs seasoned don't give a fuck about dying crazy rice eater....that's a toss up!!

 

[Weatherman2020]

And NK hits one Japanese nuclear power plant and all of that is irrelevant.

Why do you need to hit a nuke plant with a nuke weapon when you can just target Tokyo, dufus?

 

[Godboy]

the general is the dumbass
if they are using arty/rockets, and missiles on Seoul, that means the SK and US forces will move and destroy the NK military faster---get it???!!!???
he says they are going to use their military might against Seoul instead of the attacking military force???
yeah--he's a smart guy

you know I see this crap in other forums.......you think the US and SK will be like snowmen--just sitting there doing nothing

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

It won't be quick enough to stop NK from flattening Seoul first.

The artillery would be neutralized quick, and from what I read the flattening of Seoul just isn't possible

Its worse than you probably think. This is a good article about NKs artillery and its threat against Seoul.

North Korea's Simple But Deadly Artillery Holds Seoul And U.S. Hostage

arty will not win wars.....arty firing at civilians/cities doesn't help beat the opposing military forces and does not greatly panic civilians/cause the country to surrender/etc as clearly seen in WW2

German and Japanese cities were demolished---with bombs--which are much, much more powerful than arty and they lived through it....many dead, but arty is much less powerful.....it takes a looooong time and many, many rounds just to demolish one building--unless they are at point blank range aiming for the main structural areas of the building
----arty is not a game winner

and you don't think SK and the US has thought about this?

Their artillery isnt meant to win the war; its meant to deter the US from taking action against NK, and its been working for a long time.

 

[harmonica]

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

It won't be quick enough to stop NK from flattening Seoul first.

The artillery would be neutralized quick, and from what I read the flattening of Seoul just isn't possible

Its worse than you probably think. This is a good article about NKs artillery and its threat against Seoul.

North Korea's Simple But Deadly Artillery Holds Seoul And U.S. Hostage

arty will not win wars.....arty firing at civilians/cities doesn't help beat the opposing military forces and does not greatly panic civilians/cause the country to surrender/etc as clearly seen in WW2

German and Japanese cities were demolished---with bombs--which are much, much more powerful than arty and they lived through it....many dead, but arty is much less powerful.....it takes a looooong time and many, many rounds just to demolish one building--unless they are at point blank range aiming for the main structural areas of the building
----arty is not a game winner

and you don't think SK and the US has thought about this?

Their artillery isnt meant to win the war; its meant to deter the US from taking action against NK, and its been working for a long time.

once again, that is not what the arty is for
arty is for destroying and killing enemy TROOPS
arty is NOT a deterrent

Iran and Iraq had Scuds/arty and that didn't stop a war--during that war both sides attacked cities with airpower also
the Arabs had pounded many Israeli villages many times with arty--did not stop MANY wars between them
Israel has/had nukes--did not stop wars
there were MANY rocket attacks from Lebanon--that did not stop Israel from attacking into Lebanon
India and Pakistan had arty--did not stop their war

arty does not deter wars--if it did--there wouldn't have been many wars

 

[my2¢]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

 

[Godboy]

It won't be quick enough to stop NK from flattening Seoul first.

The artillery would be neutralized quick, and from what I read the flattening of Seoul just isn't possible

Its worse than you probably think. This is a good article about NKs artillery and its threat against Seoul.

North Korea's Simple But Deadly Artillery Holds Seoul And U.S. Hostage

arty will not win wars.....arty firing at civilians/cities doesn't help beat the opposing military forces and does not greatly panic civilians/cause the country to surrender/etc as clearly seen in WW2

German and Japanese cities were demolished---with bombs--which are much, much more powerful than arty and they lived through it....many dead, but arty is much less powerful.....it takes a looooong time and many, many rounds just to demolish one building--unless they are at point blank range aiming for the main structural areas of the building
----arty is not a game winner

and you don't think SK and the US has thought about this?

Their artillery isnt meant to win the war; its meant to deter the US from taking action against NK, and its been working for a long time.

once again, that is not what the arty is for
arty is for destroying and killing enemy TROOPS
arty is NOT a deterrent

Iran and Iraq had Scuds/arty and that didn't stop a war--during that war both sides attacked cities with airpower also
the Arabs had pounded many Israeli villages many times with arty--did not stop MANY wars between them
Israel has/had nukes--did not stop wars
there were MANY rocket attacks from Lebanon--that did not stop Israel from attacking into Lebanon
India and Pakistan had arty--did not stop their war

arty does not deter wars--if it did--there wouldn't have been many wars

You are uninformed. Their artillery is the ONLY thing thats stopping the US from hitting their nuclear facilities. Not their millions of soldiers, not their nukes; just the artillery aimed at Seoul.

 

[rightwinger]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

 

[Godboy]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

 

[rightwinger]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

And they will play the same game and say they will not strike unless we strike first

Hitting their nuclear sites is hitting first

 

[Godboy]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

And they will play the same game and say they will not strike unless we strike first

Hitting their nuclear sites is hitting first

...but if you were KJU, would you retaliate if you knew it would mean the end of your country and your own life?

 

[rightwinger]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

And they will play the same game and say they will not strike unless we strike first

Hitting their nuclear sites is hitting first

...but if you were KJU, would you retaliate if you knew it would mean the end of your country and your own life?

If you were DJT would you preemptively strike if you knew it would result in a counterattack against Seoul ?

That is why it is a standoff

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Wow, we have highly qualified arm chair military geniuses right here on USMB, who don't need the any experience or the on ground intelligence of planning any scenarios of attempting of invading North Korea.
But Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas has.
"From January 2012 to 2014, Jouas was intimately involved in formulating plans to counter a North Korean attack on South Korea. "This threat was the most dangerous I’d faced since the end of the Cold War, and planning for it the most challenging problem I’d encountered in my 35-year career," he said."
We might not lose the war, but the causalities, would number in the tens of millions (which would include tens of thousands of American troops and citizens. and that's just on the Korean peninsula. NK could nuke Japan and other Asian targets.
When I see arm chair generals with absolutely zero experience in planning military actions, criticizing a general who was in charge of the military in Korea, it's clear to these fools are complete idiots.
Un-fucking believable.

the general is the dumbass

He said it would take "days" to eliminate North Korean artillery, rockets and missiles that threaten the South Korean capital of Seoul, which is home to 25 million people.

if they are using arty/rockets, and missiles on Seoul, that means the SK and US forces will move and destroy the NK military faster---get it???!!!???
he says they are going to use their military might against Seoul instead of the attacking military force???
yeah--he's a smart guy

you know I see this crap in other forums.......you think the US and SK will be like snowmen--just sitting there doing nothing

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

Sure, I have no doubt that we would locate and destroy their thousands of artillery pieces at a very nice rate.


Possibly effectively ending it in a matter of weeks, maybe even days.


The death toll might only be in the tens of thousands.

They have had 64 years to harden those artillery emplacements. It is not like they are sitting in an open field.

 

[rightwinger]

Wow, we have highly qualified arm chair military geniuses right here on USMB, who don't need the any experience or the on ground intelligence of planning any scenarios of attempting of invading North Korea.
But Lt. Gen. Jan-Marc Jouas has.
"From January 2012 to 2014, Jouas was intimately involved in formulating plans to counter a North Korean attack on South Korea. "This threat was the most dangerous I’d faced since the end of the Cold War, and planning for it the most challenging problem I’d encountered in my 35-year career," he said."
We might not lose the war, but the causalities, would number in the tens of millions (which would include tens of thousands of American troops and citizens. and that's just on the Korean peninsula. NK could nuke Japan and other Asian targets.
When I see arm chair generals with absolutely zero experience in planning military actions, criticizing a general who was in charge of the military in Korea, it's clear to these fools are complete idiots.
Un-fucking believable.

the general is the dumbass

He said it would take "days" to eliminate North Korean artillery, rockets and missiles that threaten the South Korean capital of Seoul, which is home to 25 million people.

if they are using arty/rockets, and missiles on Seoul, that means the SK and US forces will move and destroy the NK military faster---get it???!!!???
he says they are going to use their military might against Seoul instead of the attacking military force???
yeah--he's a smart guy

you know I see this crap in other forums.......you think the US and SK will be like snowmen--just sitting there doing nothing

We are very adept at quickly locating where artillery fire is coming from

Sure, I have no doubt that we would locate and destroy their thousands of artillery pieces at a very nice rate.


Possibly effectively ending it in a matter of weeks, maybe even days.


The death toll might only be in the tens of thousands.

They have had 64 years to harden those artillery emplacements. It is not like they are sitting in an open field.

Actually they are behind steel doors that open as you fire and then immediately close

 

[Godboy]

I'd guess a lot would depend on who starts the war. If it is not the result of a blatant North Korea attack then America will be a house divided and North Korea could be patient and count on America's short attention span.

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

And they will play the same game and say they will not strike unless we strike first

Hitting their nuclear sites is hitting first

...but if you were KJU, would you retaliate if you knew it would mean the end of your country and your own life?

If you were DJT would you preemptively strike if you knew it would result in a counterattack against Seoul ?

That is why it is a standoff

The stand off has existed because no president has had the balls to go nuclear (rightly so). Nukes were never going to be an option for Obama and NK knew that. Trump is a different story though. If Trump says "we have decided to destroy NK with nukes if they retaliate", they have to take the threat seriously. So, is KJU suicidal? I dont think so.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I doubt if our country would tolerate a preemptive strike ....been there, done that

I doubt Kim Jong Un would be stupid enough to hit first

I think the solution is to openly tell them that we are going to hit their nuclear facilities. Id tell them we have no plans for an invasion or regime change, but if they retaliate in any way, we will be forced to burn down the entirety of NK with nuclear strikes. Kim Jong Un wont like being bitch slapped like that, but im guessing he will prefer that over nuclear destruction.

And they will play the same game and say they will not strike unless we strike first

Hitting their nuclear sites is hitting first

...but if you were KJU, would you retaliate if you knew it would mean the end of your country and your own life?

If you were DJT would you preemptively strike if you knew it would result in a counterattack against Seoul ?

That is why it is a standoff

The stand off has existed because no president has had the balls to go nuclear (rightly so). Nukes were never going to be an option for Obama and NK knew that. Trump is a different story though. If Trump says "we have decided to destroy NK with nukes if they retaliate", they have to take the threat seriously. So, is KJU suicidal? I dont think so.

Do you think people asked themselves the same question about Hitler back in the World War II?

As it turns out, he was!