Jump to content

Kim jon whathisname...


ditchman
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

if china goes seriously to war ...their economy will start to collapse.............they have soooo much forex invested abroad...they would loose access to it..........if the **** kicks off in NK they will moan and moan ...but will do nothing...except slllliidde in after it is all over....a deal that will be done before it happens...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Are we really that red button handy?

Yes,

 

funnily enough I did a open university course to top up, being a specialist I fulfilled the course requirements and could choose any two modules to make points up, I chose basic philosophy and prescriptions of nuclear warfare.

 

We have designed our weapons to be sub strategic, our stance is more aggressive than any other nuclear armed country, there is a white paper that explains this.

 

We stated heads over if the Iraqi regime (during the invasion) used chemical weapons we would retaliate with our sub strategic nuclear capability.

 

Russia and the US have a agreement we don't sign up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes,

 

funnily enough I did a open university course to top up, being a specialist I fulfilled the course requirements and could choose any two modules to make points up, I chose basic philosophy and prescriptions of nuclear warfare.

 

We have designed our weapons to be sub strategic, our stance is more aggressive than any other nuclear armed country, there is a white paper that explains this.

 

We stated heads over if the Iraqi regime (during the invasion) used chemical weapons we would retaliate with our sub strategic nuclear capability.

 

Russia and the US have a agreement we don't sign up to.

 

Unusual mix of topics, or perhaps not. :hmm:

 

Thanks for the reply, very interesting. :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stevo

Assumption ...... the mother of all f ups ! As they say.

 

I really would not want to bet either way tbh.

 

Let's be real USA if they pulled all the stops out and showed a total disregard for civilian life would 100 % anihalate NK

 

But how would they go about. I struggle to see how they could manage it without it being a total bloodbath.

I doubt they would risk an invasion as they could not get there troops on the ground fast enough. Imagine say the first 50000 US troops land on NK soil only to be met by 1.2 million and god knows how many millions of reserve NK troops. The US boys and girls wouldn't stand a chance in hell.

I doubt the US would want to send fighters and bombers in as NK has a massive amount of mobile surface to air missle systems along with all sorts of modern Wepon systems

And as so far as navel fleet is concerned yes the usa has the biggest fleet in the world. But NK has just about more subs than anyone else. Yes there old but ships are notoriously easy to sink as long as you can get a shot it in.

 

Personally I think there only real option would be to hit hard and hit first. Which has got to mean a small tac nuke ?

 

What do you rekon ??

Edited by stevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Unusual mix of topics, or perhaps not. :hmm:

 

Thanks for the reply, very interesting. :good:

Very interesting topics, funnily I was topping up on my MSc toxicology, so the chemical weaponry was of more interest.

 

Talking about North Korea I know exactly why two people were used to kill that chap with VX.

 

There's a misguided thought it's hard to make, it's not, it's easy, just very dangerous to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you rekon ??

Even at the end of my three year War Studies degree the smart money for WW3 type scenarios & more major regime changes of a hard target was based on cyber attacks.

 

Two decades on, the infrastructure to enable cyber attack is more widespread....

 

Add in a suitable EMP strike and the majority of NK's modern response capacity is fried.

 

The average NK citizen is desperate for regime change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assumption ...... the mother of all f ups ! As they say.

 

I really would not want to bet either way tbh.

 

Let's be real USA if they pulled all the stops out and showed a total disregard for civilian life would 100 % anihalate NK

 

But how would they go about. I struggle to see how they could manage it without it being a total bloodbath.

I doubt they would risk an invasion as they could not get there troops on the ground fast enough. Imagine say the first 50000 US troops land on NK soil only to be met by 1.2 million and god knows how many millions of reserve NK troops. The US boys and girls wouldn't stand a chance in hell.

I doubt the US would want to send fighters and bombers in as NK has a massive amount of mobile surface to air missle systems along with all sorts of modern Wepon systems

And as so far as navel fleet is concerned yes the usa has the biggest fleet in the world. But NK has just about more subs than anyone else. Yes there old but ships are notoriously easy to sink as long as you can get a shot it in.

 

Personally I think there only real option would be to hit hard and hit first. Which has got to mean a small tac nuke ?

 

What do you rekon ??

 

The simplest option would be for the USA to block off their oil supply. NK uses significant amounts but produces zero barrels and doesn't appear to have significant reserves (unlike the US and China who have reserves around the 20 billion barrels mark). Without oil NK's huge forces would be relatively useless and it wouldn't take that long for the entire country to grind to a halt.

Even at the end of my three year War Studies degree the smart money for WW3 type scenarios & more major regime changes of a hard target was based on cyber attacks.

 

Two decades on, the infrastructure to enable cyber attack is more widespread....

.

 

A very good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stevo

 

The simplest option would be for the USA to block off their oil supply. NK uses significant amounts but produces zero barrels and doesn't appear to have significant reserves (unlike the US and China who have reserves around the 20 billion barrels mark). Without oil NK's huge forces would be relatively useless and it wouldn't take that long for the entire country to grind to a halt.

 

Yep I see where your going with that and sounds logical. 👍

 

 

With regards cyber warfare. I've just been reading an article from the past few weeks so it's fare to say it's current. But it reckons NK is up there with the best when it come to cyber warefare shenanigans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an easy way to reduce the effect of cyber warfare - that's to stop connecting critical systems to the internet. Any utility firm, bank, power station or other, that lazily controls it's systems from the front room of an 'on-call' operator's house is bordering on negligent. It is so slack, but economical. How valuable is your system?

 

It isn't just a question of attacking software or firmware with other code - certain navies , most notably the Russian, have the assets to cut/tap subsea cables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now it is the US which is illegally bombing and interfering in 7 different conflicts all of which it either literally started or caused. You need to study the history of why there even is a North and South Korea ;) that's right, good ole US land of the Free and home of Demon-ocracy, having murdered millions of them what choice do they have but to build up a defence mechanism and what choice does the West have indeed, but to continue lying and protecting the preposterous myth that everyone else is out to start wars :whistling: whilst they only want to have 700 military bases all around the world including encircling Iran/Korea/Russia and all of ME in order to protect our way of life. :yes:

 

If you can't see through the deceptions and media complicity of our generation's dumbing down don't blame NK or anyone else for that matter.

post-33911-0-87249500-1489993651_thumb.jpg

post-33911-0-45497500-1489993668_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF NK has nukes then they may just be safe from US's insatiable need to murder ad infinitum. If they haven't then there's a chance of yet more casualties on both sides which will simply enflame our world in more and more wars for our children to enjoy. Thanks murica.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest stevo

Right now it is the US which is illegally bombing and interfering in 7 different conflicts all of which it either literally started or caused. You need to study the history of why there even is a North and South Korea ;) that's right, good ole US land of the Free and home of Demon-ocracy, having murdered millions of them what choice do they have but to build up a defence mechanism and what choice does the West have indeed, but to continue lying and protecting the preposterous myth that everyone else is out to start wars :whistling: whilst they only want to have 700 military bases all around the world including encircling Iran/Korea/Russia and all of ME in order to protect our way of life. :yes:

 

If you can't see through the deceptions and media complicity of our generation's dumbing down don't blame NK or anyone else for that matter.

Some very good points and well put 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's the Asian version of Sturgeon = totally believes in their own hype!

 

Dangerous, borderline insane, UmpaLumpa lookalike. The Korean bloke's a wrong 'un too!

Unlike Kim whatever little krankie has nukes that work, based on the Clyde. Oh ! I forgot she does not want them there so maybe

she will start trade negations with north Korea and sell them to Kim ??

Edited by big bad lindz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlike Kim whatever little krankie has nukes that work, based on the Clyde. Oh ! I forgot she does not want them there so maybe

she will start trade negations with north Korea and sell them to Kim ??

Dare say wee Jimmy would if she could but fortunately they are not hers, bit like the North Sea oil really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having read all the points raised and knowing where Kyska is coming from about our nuclear "defence" policy it,l be an E.M.P strike and a shower of cruise missiles and drones that return N.K to the stone age from the medieval period they currently inhabit .So no American boots on the ground,Then China will move in a peacekeeping force that will alter N.K forever into a "Chinese province" a la Tibet.

Trouble is Kim Jong fruit bat only needs to get 1 or 2 Nukes off at China/America/Japan for this "plan" to turn to WW3 and then its a big fat????

Edited by clakk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the policy of containment will continue. The deployment of THAAD will further isolate NK.

 

The trouble with numbers and stats is they have very little correlation to effectiveness. The Iraqi military was the fifth biggest standing army in the World pre gulf war. They were rendered ineffective and decimated by standoff munitions way before troops crossed the border.

Modern capability means massed troops are good for parades and despots ego's, nothing else.

 

I feel very sorry for the population who have endured the tender ministration of the NK regime while the rest of the World has looked the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kim is a fruit loop but as others have said he is a puppet. China negotiate with them as no one else will or can wield the clout they have. Very limited trade with other nations means they generally bow to Chinese say so.

America using the language usually reserved for badly behaved children is better than the previous decades of action regardless of cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Manpower no argument but they're dwarfed in every other category of force.

 

N. Korea vs USA

 

LAND SYSTEMS - Tank value includes Main Battle Tanks, light tanks and tank destroyers, either wheeled or tracked. AFV value includes Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs) and Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs).

 

NK

 

Tanks: 4,200

Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFVs): 4,100

Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs): 2,250

Towed-Artillery: 4,300

Multiple-Launch Rocket Systems (MLRSs): 2,400

 

USA

 

Tanks: 8,848

Armored Fighting Vehicles (AFVs): 41,062

Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs): 1,934

Towed-Artillery: 1,299

Multiple-Launch Rocket Systems (MLRSs): 1,331

 

AIR POWER - Includes both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft from all branches of service.

 

NK

Total Aircraft: 944

Fighters/Interceptors: 458

Fixed-Wing Attack Aircraft: 572

Transport Aircraft: 100

Trainer Aircraft: 169

Helicopters: 202

 

USA

Total Aircraft: 13,444

Fighters/Interceptors: 2,308

Fixed-Wing Attack Aircraft: 2,785

Transport Aircraft: 5,739

Trainer Aircraft: 2,771

Helicopters: 6,084

Attack Helicopters: 957

 

NAVAL POWER - Aircraft Carrier value includes dedicated "helicopter carrier" vessels. Total naval strength includes all known auxiliaries as well.

 

NK

Total Naval Strength: 967

Aircraft Carriers: 0

Frigates: 3

Destroyers: 0

Corvettes: 2

Submarines: 70

Coastal Defense Craft: 211

Mine Warfare: 23

Attack Helicopters: 20

 

USA

Total Naval Strength: 415

Aircraft Carriers: 19

Frigates: 6

Destroyers: 62

Corvettes: 0

Submarines: 75

Coastal Defense Craft: 13

Mine Warfare: 11

 

NK

Defense Budget: $7,500,000,000

Active Frontline Personnel: 700,000

Active Reserve Personnel: 4,500,000

 

USA

Defense Budget: $581,000,000,000

Active Frontline Personnel: 1,400,000

Active Reserve Personnel: 1,100,000

 

"Top trump" cards??

Lol.

 

I hope I'm not the only one to remember those.

 

Edd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...