It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pentagon: only ground invasion can destroy North Korean nuclear program

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: starwarsisreal
Oh come on, the bulk of those boots will be Korean and Japanese. The Americans , Canadians and Australian ground forces would likely be limited to a combined up to one thousand special forces and about 35,000-50,000 conventional forces. The Korean and Japanese would number in at least two hundred thousand in comparison.


We can get this all done in under three months and less than 100,000 dead if we just strike now!




posted on Nov, 8 2017 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry

The last info i saw shows 3 aircraft carriers are now present. The US has shifted more air wings to S.J. and Japan (F35s and attack Helicopters). More ballistic missile subs were deployed to the area. Combined US ground forces is around 80k now. Russian media (take it with a grain of salt) shows the US has pulled some forces off the DMZ and re-positioned them to a base south of Seoul. That move would be used to create a barrier (should hostilities break out) that would allow for a delaying action in order to create time to deploy additional forces. The deployment would use the rivers in and around Seoul as natural barriers, making a push south of Seoul costly for N.K.

A recent naval exercise between the US, Japan and S.K. involved over 40 naval vessels stretching from S. Korea to Japan.

I think we are at the "pray for peace but be prepared if it doesn't work" time now.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I've never been an advocate for war. However North Korea is, at the moment, the only war/conflict that needs finishing through military means. I'm not a lover of Trump, I'm the complete opposite, however I agree with him regarding diplomacy has not worked with Kimmy.

For me freeing the people of North Korea can only work via either; 1) An inside job, as in a top military officer gathers support to overthrow the puppet known as Kim (still believe the military runs the show) or 2) a full blown invasion to end it once and for all.

Now I'd rather it not be the latter as ultimately it will claim a lot of lives and could potentially start a World War. However, a quick bombing campaign on North Korean strategic and military assets and a naval blockade should help finish it quickly in my humble opinion.

However, I dont for one second believe anything will happen. I personally think Trump is the same as Kimmy, all talk no show.

Peace and Love.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Would just like to add. Even though I'd prefer unification on the Korean peninsula, I'd have no objections to China annexing the North and creating a province. The North Koreans would have a chance of eating and seeing prosperity if either those two options happen.

Or failing that give em to us (UK) we'll look after them.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Therewearethen



... I'd have no objections to China annexing the North and creating a province. ...


Your statement bears repeating...what you have suggested is likely the only workable diplomatic solution for NK. Dissolve their government with an absolute strangle hold of air-tight, multilateral, naval and military blockade / embargo. Not even single drop of oil, or grain of rice, goes in or out. Grant refugees asylum in both China and South Korea...and absolutely CRUSH the North Korean government. Grant China full rights to North Korea (and it's people) without exception. Demobilize and dismantle the DMZ (still a border, but not a 'DMZ') and normalize relations between South Korea and China.

If Trump, or any president, could pull that off they would go down in history as one of the greatest statesmen to have ever stepped foot on this Earth.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Completely agree. Again, as I stated, I'd RATHER let the South retake the North. Me personally, as stupid as it may sound, I don't recognize the North as a state and I believe the world should take that stance. Basically I'd be the world saying "Fine! If you're gonna act like brats and threaten the world with thermo-nuclear war when trying to get food for your people, then we won't talk to you and sort the problem with or with out you!".

But don't forget about my third option....fly a Union Jack over Pyongyang.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Therewearethen

Nothing against South Korea, but I just don't think they have the appetite to take North Korea. I'm sure they'd love unification, but I don't think they'd be willing to do it themselves.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Well, I read an article on the BBC backing what you say about the South not wanting it. Well the entire article wasn't all about that obviously but it effectively said regarding what you said, that previous governments were looking for re unification but not they just want peace. Seems like they are fed up of all this to be honest. Can't blame them.

I'm fed up of all the unnecessary # we see around the entire world.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Therewearethen

The biggest problem with reunification is that it will come damn close to bankrupting the South to do it, unless they get major help from outside. Bringing the standard of living in North Korea up to anything even resembling the South will take decades and billions of dollars.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Granted, but alteast aid could flow in to the North instead of having to negotiate with a nuclear armed phsycopath(s) to behave in order to get food in. And wouldn't the UN help with the costs of developing a poor country or region?

This is all theoretical of course.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Therewearethen

In theory the UN would help, but it would probably take 30 years to get funds released.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well that rules out my third option of British ownership as I can't see our government forking out the money.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

If even that quickly...and then only .05 cents on the dollar would actually go to North Korea. The rest of it would be stolen and siphoned off to personal bank accounts in Switzerland, the Bahamas and the Isle of Man.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Ah the UN. Preventing wars and creating global prosperity since 1945.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: tempestking
a reply to: starwarsisreal

i dont care what every one say the bottom line is you let them have the nukes and live with it or you spend another 5 .10 or 15 years talking crap with them again and they end up with better nukes that no one can stop or we go in now and end it all and that is the bottom line of it all ..........


I tend to agree those are the options.

Which one do you go with, because honestly all three suck a lot, and I can't decide which I would choose.

Really somehow we need to find / create a new option. I am thinking some kind of psych warfare campaign on the population to foment a revolution. What I am really not sure of is how brainwashed the people really are, and how easy it would be to break them out of their world view.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Your “defectors” mean nothing to me. Most “defectors” from the DPRK often turn out to be frauds looking for attention, and sometimes they even go back. You can get the same stories from disenfranchised “defectors” from any country really.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Therewearethen

The biggest problem with reunification is that it will come damn close to bankrupting the South to do it, unless they get major help from outside. Bringing the standard of living in North Korea up to anything even resembling the South will take decades and billions of dollars.


Here is South Korea:

- vast corruption and collusion between corporations and the state (at highest levels)
- constant socioeconomic instability, riots involving tens-hundreds of thousands of citizens
- fascist technocultural distractions
- the fact that it is a vassal state under the governance of the American Empire
- ROK military is under Pentagon command

And you think the ROK has higher standards than the DPRK? What measure of standards is this, the obsolete concept of economic growth as a measure of social development?



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TheStalkingHorse

And you think they don't? Most of North Korea doesn't even have electricity. Oh wait, let me guess, those satellite photos are faked, right? We don't really know anything about North Korea, because everyone lies about it.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TheStalkingHorse

And you think they don't? Most of North Korea doesn't even have electricity. Oh wait, let me guess, those satellite photos are faked, right? We don't really know anything about North Korea, because everyone lies about it.


So because they aren’t afflicted with light pollution, this means they are undeveloped? I fail to understand the logic here.

And how the hell do you know if they lacking electricity or not? And if they couldn’t provide essential utilities to all of their population, do ya think that maybe your country’s embargo of their economy may have something to do with that?

Oh no of course not! By American logic it’s the opposite: “we are sanctioning their economy because we feel their economy is mismanaged”.



posted on Nov, 10 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: TheStalkingHorse

Wow, seriously? You really think that they all want to live in the dark, except in Pyongyang, because they don't like light pollution? You can clearly see in satellite photos, including commercial satellites that almost the entire country is dark, except Pyongyang. So, unless those are all faked, or everyone goes to sleep at sunset, and they don't turn streetlights or anything else on, there's no power in most of the country.

It doesn't matter what I think. It's obvious that even if the previous deals to provide power plants to North Korea had gone through, you'd still blame the US for something. It's obvious that no matter what happens, it's all because of the US. Everyone else is sweet and innocent.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join