N Korea Shows Off New Tank Amid War Games

reply to post by Romantic_Rebel


Thanks, an insightful vid, imho a balanced view and my first sighting of the heir apparent, for that extra thanks.

reply to post by Thepreye


There's another set from BBC I just found on youtube. More propaganda then a documentary. Except it's more recent and you get the see daily life better.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by Thepreye

 

There's another set from BBC I just found on youtube. More propaganda then a documentary. Except it's more recent and you get the see daily life better.

Ha, if it's the one I think it is I saw it when broadcast a few days ago, tbh I thought the reporter on the spot put many of the North Koreans in a very tricky position especially given the young age and lowly social position of some she questioned, quite unfair, to try and get them to say negative things about the Dear Leader or nation. As you say though unmissable given its topicality.

reply to post by Regensturm


You must not understand the basic concepts of obsolete on the battle field. If it is inferior, it is obsolete. It's as simple as that. The bullet that travels faster makes obsolete the slower one. You can still use obsolete things, hell you can even win a war on them rarely. WW2 was nothing short of a miracle with tanks. But I guess that's because he had to get 5 shermans on onw panzer. You know, they were called coffins on wheels for a damn good reason. The men in them new very well the tank was obsolete to the panzer.

We're not really talking about confrontation here though. We are talking about parity in the strength of forces and how many decades seperate them.

yes. The number of decades the US is ahead exceeds that of North Korea by at least some 40 years, making the NK army obsolete.

Are we excusing Iraq and Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia from this equation, and the possible war on Iran? I see.

If you call those wars you don't know what war is. Those are pop shots compared to what war is. Limited engagements with farmers we raped and pillages. Nothing short of barbarian control.

I disagree. A war is a perfect testing range for upgraded weaponry, and wars of course serve the industrial-military complex well.

Not in a depression. The military Industrial complex only works for big wars like WW2. These wars are not profitable. Which is why it is insane to continue them.

t depends in what areas you refer to, air, naval, or militarily. It came to pass that the British Empire was soon overtaken by a fast-growing economy that had access to a bigger manufacturing output, that being the US of course. US domination militarily will not last forever. Spending is spending, but it only takes a breakthrough and superior manufacturing output to gain the edge. China for example, is a huge base for manufacturing as you will know, and this is how the US powered it's economy, through manufacturing.

Perhaps I did not mention this. I fully foresee a World Union made up of The P5+1 nations within the next few decades. There is much more to be gained in peace than in war. And until the P5+1 start to hate each other as bad as the cold war, then you are not going to see a major war occur.

That said, I doubt the US will even still be around in 5 years and I doubt NK and Iran will ever have the chance to show their military power. It is highly likely that the Us will fall into a civil war and the European and African Union will be fighting the Russians and their allies, and China will just make money off of the war a la America in WW2. What we are seeing is basically ww1 redone. America is Russia, Europe is Europe, Russia is Germany and China is America, in terms of their roles.

And so is the rest of the world.

Difference being they are just starting, the US has been doing ti for 20 years.

Economically yes, but militarily, North Korea possesses enough funds to try to modernise it's armour via foreign purchase or by home-grown reverse engineering.

Why would anybody sell to NK when they are becoming unstable internally and any localized war is likely to be short and not profitable.

I have not called them remotely a threat. I have stated that North Korea's economy is driven by it's military first spending. As that get's priority spending it is not hard to imagine North Korea would strive to modernise it to within financial constraints and other factors.

I truly doubt that 40 billion can buy anything worth mentioning in terms of an army to compete with the US.

WW1 was trenches. WW2 was not. That's why WW2 Germany got very far. WW1 Germany did not get far nor did they advance anywhere near something to be considered close to victory.

All and all the fact remains that the most modern army wins and more importantly the right use of it. The German army in ww2 to this day influences what we produce and design. It's safe to say most if not all modern military equipment was invented by the Nazis.

So why did they lose? Because Hitler got addicted to '___' and went crazy. Our army and government are far more complex and that is why we would win, assuming the government is still around in 5 years.

Vulnerable like any other Tank.

Obsolete like any other tank. Tanks have only purposes like you said. Fear and mobile artillery. They are no longer used to engage other tanks. Though they can if needed, as rare as that will ever occur.

Let's hope we never get to find out what is the reality of a war there.

Like I said. If the US government falls due to instability, then it's anybody's game. You can bet your behind China wants NK and Japan and SE Asia and if the US was not there, they would grab the whole of it.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Not at all. I have been studying North Korea for a while now. Why has Kim Jong Il been in power this long? Think about it!

ummm...

Ruthless brutality. Reeducation camps.
Not to mention the complete and total brain washing of the masses on a scale that makes the Wests MSM look like child's play.

sounds crazy-but i pick up kim on my cb - kims a big cb trucker fan-
and i have a message here..ok-
..Hey! what up yankee dog? this kim jung ill- axis of evil #one-
divine punisher of the round eye-no lie..
i float like butterfries and stink like bees..
so on your knees..see i rap and scrap
drink some scotch, take a nap..which reminds me-
What about this bar tab usa? many brillions of dollars.
pay up uncle sucker !
or heavenly retribution beyond dreams of pain
in most privates of suffering will ensue.
and dont mess with texas- ha funny guy huh?
lighten up duke, chill with Ill.. check my new tank..
sick dope huh? it got tape deck- shag carpet-
gangsta white walls..bad to bone al capone..
so whatch out - dont make me mad max..
no more rope a dope this time get for reals..
i smack down the clown charlie brown..
terror of sweaty nights to america!

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Not at all. I have been studying North Korea for a while now. Why has Kim Jong Il been in power this long? Think about it!

ummm...

Ruthless brutality. Reeducation camps.
Not to mention the complete and total brain washing of the masses on a scale that makes the Wests MSM look like child's play.

Do you have a bone to pick with me or something. Seems your having a negative reactions to my comments.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Ruthless brutality. Reeducation camps.
Not to mention the complete and total brain washing of the masses on a scale that makes the Wests MSM look like child's play.

All of that achieved by a thicko amazing, look the guy's obviously not thick, because I say this doesn't mean in any way that I like him but I respect him like every US pres has during the years of his reign.

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by oozyism

 

It isnt hard to have unmanned aircraft, get you one of those Remote controlled Airplanes strap a video camera on it, and enhance the controller, BOOM you have an umanned Aircraft.

Does hating your own country ever get old? Hate the Government but not your country.

Yeah, the ones you are talking about can be bought in super markets here in NZ.

Unmanned aircraft with missiles, and long range? LOL.. Why does Turkey want to spend millions getting one from the US?

And no I don't hate my country, I hate propaganda and those who swallow it, it gives them stinky breath.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Calling everything a "camp" is a very good propaganda tactic Slayer, isn't it? It reminds you of death "camps" lol.

Even people who work, are said to be sent by force to labor camps lol.

While China which has hundreds, to thousands of people working day and night in one big factory is not called labor "camps".

Do you see the propaganda?

And ultimately the question still remains, where do you get your information from? Is your sources by any chances (RFA)?

reply to post by oozyism


SEMPER FI

Bros.
DIG IN!

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by oozyism

 

SEMPER FI

Bros.
DIG IN!

Cute

He must be a good member of your group for the info.

reply to post by oozyism


I'm drunk! you want To See a klil???????

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by oozyism

 

I'm drunk! you want To See a klil???????

Now I feel like going to the liquor store, buying a Jack Daniels. I'm missing out, if only we could share drinks through e-mail

Enjoy your drinks ..

reply to post by SLAYER69


Don't drink and type. My mother always told that to me.

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Not at all. I have been studying North Korea for a while now. Why has Kim Jong Il been in power this long? Think about it!

ummm...

Ruthless brutality. Reeducation camps.
Not to mention the complete and total brain washing of the masses on a scale that makes the Wests MSM look like child's play.

Do you have a bone to pick with me or something. Seems your having a negative reactions to my comments.

Easy to have a negative reaction tou your comments when they reflect a shocking lack of knowledge on a subject (NK) you claim to have studied "for a while now".

OMG, how does any ruthless dictator stay in power? You ever see that composite photo of the earth from space at night? It's lit up all over the world from city lights - except NK is dark. Dark because Kim keeps his people in conditions that are not even 3rd world level.

Take a look for yourself.

[url=http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=h_earth_lights_eurasia_02.jpg&cap=Urban+lights+in+Europa+and+Asia.]source[/u rl]

Originally posted by Gorman91

You must not understand the basic concepts of obsolete on the battle field. If it is inferior, it is obsolete. It's as simple as that. The bullet that travels faster makes obsolete the slower one. You can still use obsolete things, hell you can even win a war on them rarely. WW2 was nothing short of a miracle with tanks.

If the Tank was obsolete, it would not be used, simple as that. Why use an obsolete weapon in war if it's use cannot handle the battlefield?

The Tank is far from obsolete.

Originally posted by Gorman91
But I guess that's because he had to get 5 shermans on onw panzer. You know, they were called coffins on wheels for a damn good reason. The men in them new very well the tank was obsolete to the panzer.

I must correct you here. The reference in regards to taking 5 Shermans to take on a Panzer is actually in regards to The Panther, which was designation Panzer V and was inspired by the T-34. The Panther was in comparison to the Sherman, advanced and superior because it was not of the same class as the Sherman, whose class was the Panzer III and Panzer IV.

The Shermans were given derisory nicknames because they were inferior to the German Tanks. But they were not obsolete, and could still be used on a battlefield.

The Panther's rival in class was only matched by the US with the introduction of the M26 Pershing, or alternatively, the Sherman Firefly and other upgunned Sherman variants.

Originally posted by Gorman91
yes. The number of decades the US is ahead exceeds that of North Korea by at least some 40 years, making the NK army obsolete.

In your opinion. We have not seen North Korea's military capability in war since 1953, so we should not get ahead of ourselves here. 40 years? No, I would say that the North Koreans are behind techologically and in spending. But obsolete? We can not state such things when we do not know what North Korea's capability is in war. Inferior would be more accurate, but obsolete? No.

Originally posted by Gorman91
If you call those wars you don't know what war is. Those are pop shots compared to what war is. Limited engagements with farmers we raped and pillages. Nothing short of barbarian control.

They are still wars, despite they being comparable to Victorian colonial wars against 'the savages'. And their use also serves to be a testing ground for various new weaponry. The Drone, for example.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Not in a depression. The military Industrial complex only works for big wars like WW2. These wars are not profitable. Which is why it is insane to continue them.

But yet after the depression we had WW2 and we may indeed see the same in time with the current economic climate as a precursor.

The current wars are profitable, if one looks closer at the geopolitical and geostrategical positioning of such wars. Mainly Central Asia.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Perhaps I did not mention this. I fully foresee a World Union made up of The P5+1 nations within the next few decades. There is much more to be gained in peace than in war. And until the P5+1 start to hate each other as bad as the cold war, then you are not going to see a major war occur.

The very same was said prior to WW1, when we had old enemies the UK and France cosying up, Germany trading with the US, and when we had the League of Nations before WW2.

Originally posted by Gorman91
That said, I doubt the US will even still be around in 5 years and I doubt NK and Iran will ever have the chance to show their military power. It is highly likely that the Us will fall into a civil war and the European and African Union will be fighting the Russians and their allies, and China will just make money off of the war a la America in WW2. What we are seeing is basically ww1 redone. America is Russia, Europe is Europe, Russia is Germany and China is America, in terms of their roles.

An interesting theory. I do believe China is getting to the same position now that the US was in the early half of the twentieth century, ready to usurp the order of old.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Difference being they are just starting, the US has been doing ti for 20 years.

All armies that can afford to modernise and do research into modernising will do so. The US is not alone in this regard, and the US should not, and I most surely presume does not assume that it is the only one doing so.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Why would anybody sell to NK when they are becoming unstable internally and any localized war is likely to be short and not profitable.

Because where there is conflict, there is profit. If North Korea gained more capable weaponry, the war would go on longer, and become more profitable.

Such scenarios of a conflict would include a possible new Korean War, or a civil war in North Korea between rival factions in the wake of Kim's death.

Originally posted by Gorman91
I truly doubt that 40 billion can buy anything worth mentioning in terms of an army to compete with the US.

Well, that depends on where their spending would be focused, and whether they could balance such spending to provide capability that is not lop-sided and leave other areas vulnerable.

Originally posted by Gorman91
WW1 was trenches. WW2 was not. That's why WW2 Germany got very far. WW1 Germany did not get far nor did they advance anywhere near something to be considered close to victory.

WW1 Germany nearly took Paris. It was in range of German artillery fire. Germany made advances into Belgium and France and on the Russian Front.

They came many times close to victory.

Originally posted by Gorman91
All and all the fact remains that the most modern army wins and more importantly the right use of it.

But even an army generationally behind can challenge that theory if deployed and utilised correctly to counter it's short-comings.

Originally posted by Gorman91
The German army in ww2 to this day influences what we produce and design. It's safe to say most if not all modern military equipment was invented by the Nazis.

For the most part very true. The same for the space programmes.

Originally posted by Gorman91
So why did they lose? Because Hitler got addicted to '___' and went crazy. Our army and government are far more complex and that is why we would win, assuming the government is still around in 5 years.

Actually it was because Hitler became paranoid and restricted his Generals from making any big autonomous decisions.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Obsolete like any other tank. Tanks have only purposes like you said. Fear and mobile artillery. They are no longer used to engage other tanks. Though they can if needed, as rare as that will ever occur.

Again this insistence that the Tank is obsolete when it's quite clearly not. Tank on Tank engagements happened in 2003 in the Iraq War.

Originally posted by Gorman91
Like I said. If the US government falls due to instability, then it's anybody's game. You can bet your behind China wants NK and Japan and SE Asia and if the US was not there, they would grab the whole of it.

I think it will be anybody's game whether the US government falls or not. The US is in decline, and there will come a time when there is the changing of the guard.

Just as the British handed over 'superpower' status to the US after WW2, so the US will eventually hand over it's 'superpower' status.

The important question is this: Will it go quietly, and accept it's new position in the world like the UK, or go down dramatically?

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Regensturm]

Well its not gonna have many "tankers" bricking it is it. But i suppose if made in enough numbers it would give NATO/UN a run for there money. and don't forget China's "just up the road"
Copy from Militery Today .com..

" The M2002 losses to most contemporary main battle tanks in all critical aspects, such as protection, firepower and mobility. It could not match even older Russian, Chinese or South Korean main battle tanks. Currently it is unknown if any specialized variant of this MBT, such as armored recovery vehicle, bridgelayer or engineering vehicle have been produced"

Edit for photo:






[edit on 19-8-2010 by foxhoundone]

[edit on 19-8-2010 by foxhoundone]

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Romantic_Rebel

 

No, from Sun Tzu.

Feign weakness when you are strong, feign strength when you are weak.

The thing about Sun is he talks as if his foes are stupid. His stuff may still hold on the field to a large degree but this is a big time spy world making a point of good assessments of weakness and strength.

A point...there is nothing you can put on a tank in the way of armor that would save it from a burst of DU from a Wart Hog. Making a big deal out of a new tank in this day and age is not Sun Tzu... its desperation.

Originally posted by Logarock

The thing about Sun is he talks as if his foes are stupid. His stuff may still hold on the field to a large degree but this is a big time spy world making a point of good assessments of weakness and strength.

SUN TZU said:
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.