USA vs. NK

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
I'm just happy knowing they would never attack my remote town in the middle of no where with 8,000 people!

Might want to read what NT said:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=261&highlight=alaska

 

[CrazyLiberal]

My town is over 600 miles from the Military bases in Anchorage, AK. There is no civilization within 300 miles of my town I feel relatively safe

 

[Johnney]

jesus christ your in the middle of no where!

 

[CrazyLiberal]

Yep

There are no roads off the island either. Any nature freak would love it, but not me. The only way off the island is a 2 hour plane trip that flys to Juneau Alaska (the capital, which has about 4 times more population) 3 times a week

 

[Johnney]

now thats insane... please tell me you were born there...!

 

[CrazyLiberal]

No I was not born here. I'm forced to live here. I was born in Anchorage, that city is a great place.

 

[eric]

Now is it not time we start to seriously develop missle defense systems ?

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by CrazyLiberal
No I was not born here. I'm forced to live here.

You're in jail?

 

[Johnney]

 

[Avatar4321]

An attack on North Korea could start WW3. North Korea has nuclear bombs that can reach the Pacific Coast of the USA

WW3 was over years ago. We won the cold war.

They could nuke Los Angeles within hours of us attacking them.

All the more reason to support SDI rather than oppose it.

China would most likely back them and Russia would not got involved in the war. In the case of a WW3 it would most likely be NK China vs USA Britain.

Doubt it. China doesnt want nukes going off near N Korea. The winds would blow the fallout over them.

Whether we like it or not it would of been impossible for us to win WW2 if the Russians had sides with the Germans or remained neutral.

I dont think so. The Soviets helped. but we could have done it without them. We did have nuclear bombs at the end of the war. it just would have been alot more bloody. Im rather glad the commies did do something right and fight Hilter. One of the few things theyve done right.

North Korea has the 4th largest Army in the world, and China has the 3rd.

True but our army sucked compared to the Germans and Japanese in WW2 and we beat them. Wed just probably have to reinstate the draft. But i still think the fact that N Korea would probably be severely weakened by hunger would stop them from being as big as a problem as we might think. And i dont buy that china would support them.

IMO if we attacked NK there is a large possibility of nuclear holocaust so we must tread carefully.

I agree, we need to tread carefullly. And we need to make sure John Kerry is not elected. We already know the North Koreans would rather negociate with him because they think he is more willing to give them what they want.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
I dont think so. The Soviets helped. but we could have done it without them. We did have nuclear bombs at the end of the war. it just would have been alot more bloody. Im rather glad the commies did do something right and fight Hilter. One of the few things theyve done right.

At no point during WW2 was any less than 75% of the German wehrmacht engaged on the Eastern Front. Even during the invasion and conquest of France the vast majority of the German army was operating in the east against possible Soviet aggression. A great deal of the time the Red Army was contending with as much as 95% of all German land forces.

The Soviets did more than help, losing over 27 million lives.

 

[supermarine]

Hello boys, IM baaaack! Well anyway, i do agree with you Zhukov, the russians did do ALOT IN that war. And they suffered much more casualties than the brits and the americans combined. But keep in mind(im not going against the russian soldiers and stuff, they weere better than nazis) the russians did have consentration camps too in siberia. They killed jews too. (the nazis were much worse though) Stalin may have been on our side during the war, but he was a tyrant almost as bad as hitler. Shortly after they "liberated" the countries in EAstern Europe, they quickly came behind the iron curtan, away from western society. Now dont get me wrong, if it wasnt for the russians, we probably would have lost the war against the Germans, and we would be also fighting the russains. Yes it's true, GErmany and russia were allies at the bigining of the war, and if germany didnt turn on them, We would have been speaking russian or german right now, depending on who took america, and(or) won the war between the germans and russians. (War between them was inevitable)

 

[_dmp_]

Comparing casualties is not a good measurement of amount of help. Lots of things cause casualties.

That said, Had the USSR not been such a big player in WW2, I'd wager most of Europe would still be under German control. They were huge.


re: USA v. NK...

NK has been hootin and hollerin for decades. Nothing they say now should lead ppl to believe we are any closer/further than war than say, 10 years ago.

 

[evancity2]

We were comeing up from below. No, had the Russians been nutral, we would have won, it just would have taken much more time.

 

[Avatar4321]

From what i understood alot of the lives the Soviets lost were soldiers Stalin killed for not wanting to stand against the Germans.

like I said, there is no doubt that they did help. But i still believe we could have done it without them. It just would have ment a longer war. alot more lives lost. Do you think having 100 of the german troops against us would have stood much ground if Hitler had a few atom bombs drop on berlin?

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
like I said, there is no doubt that they did help. But i still believe we could have done it without them. It just would have ment a longer war. alot more lives lost. Do you think having 100 of the german troops against us would have stood much ground if Hitler had a few atom bombs drop on berlin?

With all due respect, you simply don't understand the scope of what were two distinctly different wars in Europe.

Between the USA and the UK, in both theatres of the war, they lost a combined 700,000 civilians and soldiers.

The Soviets lost at least 8 MILLION soldiers and at least 16 MILLION civilians. The city of Leningrad was surrounded and pounded with artillery for 900 days. 1.5 million civilians were killed by shelling or starved to death in that one city alone.

There are a lot of what-if's involved here, but if it were not for Hitler's intention to invade and destroy the Soviet Union from the begining, England would have been conquered.

From where would we have flown our nuclear bombers then? A roundtrip flight from North America to Berlin? That would have been a feat, not impossible, but certainly difficult. Germany on the other hand would have had the advantage of being able to launch the 6 engine bombers they were designing (they called it the New York Bomber) from England. Then you have bombers that can hit our eastern seaboard while we have to fly over occupied Europe to hit Berlin.

It would have been a completely different war without the Soviets. Had Hitler managed to conquer England before Pearl Harbor his declaration of war against us may never have happened because absent our support of England we would not have been in his way. It would have been the U.S. occupied with our war in the Pacific when one day New York was incinerated by the Nazi Atomic bomb.

The key is, without the Germans being primarily occupied by the Soviets in the east, it would have been impossible for us to land in Europe let alone conquer it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Unfortunatelly this discussion is based on what ifs. We dont know what would have happened otherwise. Im aware of went on in WW2. Heck i have a degree in it. But I think we could have won regardless..because we had to.

 

[supermarine]

i completly agree with zhukov, more than half of the german soldiers were preoccupied with the war on russia. It was hard enough going through western europe with the amount of troops there, if there was no war with russia, the size of the armies of western germany would have at least quadubled in size. IF NOT MORE. I hate to admit it, but with us sending troops into the pacific, the amount of troops that we would have sent to europe would be miniscule if it wasn't for russia. And also, when i said that the russians took many casualties, that just shows how big the german army was, it takes a lot of men to fight, and put up a good fight against the russians. Even if they used strategy against them and caused many defeats for the russians, it would still take a lot of men. we would have lost the war if it wasnt for the russians.

 

[evancity2]

OKAY. LETS GET DOWN TO THE VERY RESEAN OF THE RUSSIAN CASUALTIES. DO YOU GUYS KNOW NOTHING OF THE SCUICIDAL CHARGES JUST SO THE RUSSIANS COULD GET TO BERLIN FASTER THAN EISENHOWER? PLEASE, DO NOT USE EVIDENCE THAT OPPOSES YOU AURGUMENT FOR YOU ARGUEMENT! AND YA, THE RUSSIANS DID TAKE GREAT LOSSES BECAUSE THE GERMANS HAD STRONGER FORCES, BUT THAT WAS BEFORE THE AMERICAN AND BRITTISH AND CANADIANS ARRIVED.

 

[Zhukov]

It all comes down to my first point.

At no time did the combined forces of England (which included Canadians, Australians, Indians, and all sorts of miscellaneous others), the United States, and the French resistance, on every front in which we confronted them, have to contend with more than ONE FOURTH of the German army.

Yes, Red Army soldiers ran at the Germans without guns. Yes, Red Army soldiers were shot by their own military police forces, the NKVD. That's partially why their soldiers suffered perhaps EIGHT times the deaths that the US and UK suffered in both the European and Pacific theatres. Stalin had already won the war by the time we landed at Normandy, and he knew it.

Again it's all what if's. Personally, I don't believe we would have won it without the Soviets, and I think everyone knew it at the time. Why do you think Stalin was allowed to enslave half of Europe? Hell, we almost gave him half of Japan, and reneged at the end of the war.

Of course, wether we would have won it or not without the Soviets is a silly question as there would have been no WW2 without the Soviet-German conflict. Hitler didn't start a war because he wanted England, he wanted Eastern Europe.

Turn the cap-lock off.