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.

 

Former deputy commander of U.S. Forces in Korea says "US could lose"

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Former deputy commander of U.S. Forces in Korea says US could lose in Korea. A lot of people seem to think a war with NK would be a cakewalk. I see a lot of comparisons to the Iraq war. Bush 1 was warned not to remove Saddam during the first gulf war. Bush 2 went ahead and did it anyway creating a power vacuum and a quagmire that we're still caught up in to this day. Here we are and people are pushing for another war.

NK has a 1.2 million man army and any buildup of forces on the peninsula will be seen as an act of aggression causing NK to attack before full resources are in place. Unlike Iraq we won't have a chance to build forces up for an invasion. I don't think China is going to sit idle and let NK fall to the US without intervening. The last thing they want is a unified Korea backed by America on their border.

Millions dead to the cost of trillions to the American tax payer. And we complain about feeding the poor in this country to the cost of pennies in comparison to what we spend on war.

You can blame this foreign policy nightmare on Obama Bush Clinton Reagan who ever. This is 75 years of failed foreign policy biting us in the ass. This is what we get for being the world police since WW2. I hope you have your draft cards filled out kiddies because this has the probability of getting out of control. Especially when we're talking about nuclear weapons.

www.yahoo.com...
edit on 12-11-2017 by wantsome because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Why Does America Keep Losing Wars?

The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars on wars and sends thousands of soldiers around the world to fight in them, but it seems unable to translate all that might into anything that could be called victory.



+3 more 
posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: DerBeobachter




The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars on wars and sends thousands of soldiers around the world to fight in them, but it seems unable to translate all that might into anything that could be called victory.


That's because our military is ran by a bunch of worthless people called politicians.

No one living has seen what our military can actually do.

Someone takes their leash off?

Hell would be unleashed.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   
NK could be wiped out with the turn of a switch..
I think there is a reason that guy is a "former" commander..
Perhaps in a time with cavalry and catapults.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spacespider
NK could be wiped out with the turn of a switch..
I think there is a reason that guy is a "former" commander..
Perhaps in a time with cavalry and catapults.


It's not as simple as turning switches and wiping out NK. There are tens of millions of people being held hostage by that regime. They don't deserve to be wiped out. They deserve to be free.

To say nothing of the countless hundreds of thousands of South Koreans who will suffer.

The only realistic option is that the people of NK take out their government in a revolution.

That said if they fire a missile at the US, Europe or anyone else for that matter all bets should be off.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DerBeobachter

When was the last time the US military was taken off it's leash?



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: wantsome


One single Ohio class boomer boat (nuclear submarine) can level every city/installation in the country. No one will lose to NK.

Their WMD/artillery would be destructive, but don't kid yourself here, NK isn't a world class power or threat. They can cause damage, but that is it. We can totally annihilate every square inch of their country if needed. And we rightfully would do just that to maintain total US superiority over NK.

Besides, by the time those brainwashed socialists/communists reach South Korea, they'll realize everything they've been told about Western civilization was a communist lie to keep them down/brainwashed (I'm sorry, to keep them "equal" - equally poor and downtrodden that is). Realizing everything you've ever been told is a lie will break even the most ideologically fanatical forces. Lets also not ignore the fact that their communist dictatorship considers 25% of their population to be "hostile."

President Trump isn't a white glove kind of guy. If the situation calls for it, North Korea will face fire and fury like the world has never seen before (his own words). Don't doubt the President's resolve or intent - he will disarm NK of all weapons of mass destruction and rid the people of the Kim cult-dictatorship.

edit on 11/12/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Just blow away kim and give North Korea to China. let them set up someone to run the place, someone who has to be approved by the UN to make sure another Kim does not come back in power.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse


Exactly. We know at a bare minimum 25% of their population is against the Kim regime. The other 75% probably agree, but are too terrified to say anything. Speaking up means execution, starvation, collective punishment or worse.

If we gave them the chance, Kim would be hauled out to the closest tree in a public square. Maybe they could even hang him from his grandfather's statue.

No one enjoys being poor/starving/oppressed.
edit on 11/12/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spacespider
NK could be wiped out with the turn of a switch..
I think there is a reason that guy is a "former" commander..
Perhaps in a time with cavalry and catapults.


And if we wiped them off the face of the planet with a 'turn of the switch' what would be the repercussions?

Do you think we would get away with it? I would bet that the USA would be in a far worse place if we took that action than if NK launched a nuke at us and hit one of our cities.

How well are we liked around the world? Those dictators that we forcefully installed won't be around for ever and I think the memories of the people that we have invaded and killed over the last 30 years will come back to haunt us.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

WW2.

Remember the results there?



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: wantsome

It would take too long.

We COULD win. The problem is FEW ever figured out how to wage a "free of cost" war.

It would break our financial back. As far as lives lost, which leaders dont really care about mostly, it would be worse than Syria.

Also, what is "victory"?

When does it end?



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Br34kingp01nt

originally posted by: Spacespider
NK could be wiped out with the turn of a switch..
I think there is a reason that guy is a "former" commander..
Perhaps in a time with cavalry and catapults.


It's not as simple as turning switches and wiping out NK. There are tens of millions of people being held hostage by that regime. They don't deserve to be wiped out. They deserve to be free.

To say nothing of the countless hundreds of thousands of South Koreans who will suffer.

The only realistic option is that the people of NK take out their government in a revolution.

That said if they fire a missile at the US, Europe or anyone else for that matter all bets should be off.


I'm willing to bet those captives would willingly give up their lives knowing their captors in NK were turned into glass and clay. And you are right, they don't deserve that. Their captors do. Kim Jong Un deserves an agonizing death.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
North Korea has 4200 tanks, while the United States seems to have closer to 1300. I found this information in a Google search. If the U.S. attacked North Korea, NK would probably shell civilian cities in South Korea, causing tens of thousands of casualties. NK also has anti-air guns that make air assaults nearly impossible without first invading on the ground.

Unfortunately, with no invasion, North Korea will probably keep on developing their nuclear technology until they can nuke the U.S. mainland.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

What about a North Korean revolution where the people overthrow Kim? Someone said it will end the threat of North Korea's nuclear ambition. I disagree because what happens when the revolution gets hijacked by someone similar to Maximilian Robespierre? Last thing you want is a nuclear armed Robespierre.
edit on 11/12/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
NK also has anti-air guns that make air assaults nearly impossible without first invading on the ground.


Anti-aircraft guns are obsolete as a mainline defense against air attacks and only used as part of a final defense system for naval vessels.



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: DerBeobachter

When was the last time the US military was taken off it's leash?


World War 2




posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: PorteurDeMort

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: DerBeobachter

When was the last time the US military was taken off it's leash?


World War 2

Yeah is that why NK was divided and no peace treaty was ever signed? Or what about the 60,000 troops we lost in Vietnam? I guess we didn't try enough then either right?
edit on 12-11-2017 by wantsome because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
Why Does America Keep Losing Wars?

The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars on wars and sends thousands of soldiers around the world to fight in them, but it seems unable to translate all that might into anything that could be called victory.




Militarily, we don’t.

Politically we lose every single time because we think we can make war a pretty thing for gullible idiots. Add to that the financial incentives of prolonging wars and you have a recipe for disaster.

The military only has 1 purpose. To kill people and break stuff. It’s extremely adept that doing that. Better than anyone else and we have yet to see what we can do without a leash attached.

I left the army in 2016. I was a Blackhawk crew chief/door gunner. I have yet to see what we’re really capable of, even though I was exposed to all the technology and tactics available on a modern battlefield.

There are places we’re not allowed to operate, people we aren’t allowed to capture or kill, and we have to warn people before we come and get em.

Stupid rules like that have been around for decades. Those rules cost lives and prolong wars.

We don’t fight to win. We nation build and create clandestine regimes for profit.
edit on 12 11 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 12 11 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: wantsome

originally posted by: PorteurDeMort

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: DerBeobachter

When was the last time the US military was taken off it's leash?


World War 2

Yeah is that why NK was divided and no peace treaty was ever signed? Or what about the 60,000 troops we lost in Vietnam? I guess we didn't try enough then either right?

No, we didn't. We severely handicapped our military. How many did we kill btw?




top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join