Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

North Korea: its all fun and games till someone loses a city.

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueAjah

Originally posted by Druscilla

It's a long way from NK to US.
Any missile headed toward the US would need run a gauntlet of missile defense systems.


Maybe.

But if we are so well prepared, why is there a sudden rush to build more missile defense, especially in Alaska and the East Coast? They stopped building those for a long time (I think on orders from Obama, but I read that someplace and don't have backup right now). Now there is a plan to build up, because our defenses are not adequate to stop the current threats.

We may have good defenses, but I doubt we have every hole covered.

Hawaii is part of the US, and they are less than 5,000 miles from North Korea.
Alaska is less than 4,000 from NK.
The US has military bases and citizens in South Korea, Japan, etc. so North Korea hitting them would be as painful as a mainland attack.

The US is not so invulnerable as people think. I agree with the OP. There is way too much complacency.


It's all a cover to arm up against China. The new missle defense posturing has nothing to do with NK at all, but it works as an advantage to build up against the real or perceived Chinese threat.




posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by PLAYERONE01
 


I think the main reason that your average American is not so concerned, or sees our country in the light you are painting is because most Americans know this:

War with NK would mean, no more NK, but USA will still be here.

You're average person here is not really concerned about people in SK. They're not really concerned about US forces in SK. Nor Japan, nor Guam. They are bit concerned about Alaska and Hawaii, but so far, at least as the media paints it, they're not very impressed with NK's technology as far as having weapons to deliver them here in the US main land. Quite the opposite. They've been painted as someone trying to use a BB gun at a tactical assault range.

If something does happen, yes, it will be devastating to SK, and possible Japan. There are some concerns over Guam, Alaska and Hawaii.

But let us face it, even if it does happen, do you think your average US citizen in say, Iowa is going to be worried that when they walk out of Walmart, they'll find NK troops and armor divisions invading their city? Landing on a beach in San Diego? Paratrooping into Dallas or Forth Worth?

No.

So yes, you do have some US citizens concerned, but then the vast majority of us don't live in SK, Japan, Guam, Alaska or Hawaii.

However, you think we need to be more concerned.

Okay. Exactly what do you think we (the US) should do? Send more ships? More troops? Strike first? Little Kim would LOVE that, and is why we're refraining and waiting.

Maybe we should just abandon SK? Technically their still at war with NK, and always have been. The war never actually ended in 1953. It was and has been just a truce. Should we just abandon them? Pat them on the back and say "Good luck. You're about to be over run by a million man fanatical army that will murder your people (old, sick, women, children, etc) just to make a statement." ?

Pull out of Japan too? Wish them luck as well?

Or remove the sanctions, and let the spoiled kid, who's throwing a tantrum have their way? Because we know that always works out with our kids, right?

So I am curious: what is it you want the US to do?



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
There are PLENTY of targets within close range for the North Koreans.

They don't NEED to hit Alaska or California.

They only need to hit Pacific U.S. Bases, and possibly Hawaii.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Timely
 


I think the U.S. will get a Black Eye (staged of course) that way we can move the agenda closer to fulfillment.

By doing this their investors can also see all the new technology at work in real life combat.

The U.S. is one thing. It is a fighting machine, always has been and always will be.

Staged Black eye or not, it is the quickest way to rally the people behind a battle cry for vengeance.

But I have to give it to the U.S. marines tho.

The U.S. marines do not # around, did you know they would turn the oil mixture up on the convoys when coming to a town in desert storm just for intimidation. All that black smoke, noise and dust barreling down on you. The marines are bad-ass killers. When they are told to take an objective they will not stop until it is done or they are ordered too.

When the U.S. war machine has been given the go by congress, it is and will always be world changing. Like it or not. It's just the way it is.

Do I support the U.S. war machine? No of course not the string-pullers are corrupt as hell.

In the end Korea would loose against the U.S.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Hmmm interesting, I applaud you for giving us a demonstration so early on Druscilla of the arrogance I was explaining. lol, amazing. its around 7000-8000 klms from the northern most part of North Korea to say Seattle and maybe L.A. but hey we dont really know what they have in store, but as long as your bullet proof ego's keep you going, it will make great TV if it all goes down.
BTW, your still in the middle east fighting goat farmers, this guy has a real army.


Arrogance? No...she's right.

We do know what they have in store, because in order to do any of it, they have to test the missiles. We do believe they have missiles capable of hitting the Pacific coast. Of course we also believe they currently lack the ability to mount nuclear warheads on those particular missiles, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

So, lets say they launch 100 missiles (I'm feeling really generous) towards the US. Numerous redundant systems detect the launch. Land-based Patriot 3 missiles are launched from SK first, and will get about 60 of them as they go into the atmosphere (short range) (the defense department would put it about 80, but I'm not as optimistic). Sea-based Aegis missiles would then get about 30 of the remaining 40 missiles. (medium range). The remaining 10 would then be taken out by the midcourse defense stage (space-based kill vehicles). Even if some of those got through, now, in the terminal stage, they must then get through the same Patriot 3/Aegis gauntlet again. Good luck.

And this is just the PUBLIC info. Add in THELs (Tactical High Energy Lasers) and ABLs (Airborne Lasers), which have both been successfully tested as early as the 80's, so you can bet some are in deployment...and yeah, it allows for some confidence.

However, ballistic missiles aren't the real threat from NK...terrorist style suit case dirty bombs are likely a more realistic and difficult to counter threat.

However, if Kim used these (either nuclear or biological), well, see the earlier post. It's suicide.


As for fighting goat farmers...don't kid yourself...those are never-ending policing actions, not warfare with an objective...apples and oranges.
edit on 27-3-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by PLAYERONE01
 





BTW, your still in the middle east fighting goat farmers, this guy has a real army.


Goat farmers are better fed then his army.......how long do you think they could really go to war for?

They dont have the supplies or the logistical means to do so........they dont have the means to feed a fighting army......

One of the first rules in warfare is to be able to supply your army.......they simply dont have the means......

Its not feasible for him to commit to any kind of strike, period......



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Gah you just crushed the OP.

Of course we aren't seriously concerned with the "rhetoric" NK spews weekly. We are however concerned with China helping them get this technology and protecting Japan and SK as well as our personnel stationed in these areas.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Technically we should be untouchable from an attack by NK. But as other posters have said, there is a chance one might accidentally slip thru. However I don't think this will happen. Not on the US main land anyways. Other sites like Hawaii or US bases would be targets.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by PLAYERONE01
 


a nuclear rocket from North Korea would never hit the US. It would be shot down, and if you dont think so, you are out of touch with reality. A "briefcase nuke" smuggled into the country and detonated is another story.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


That's the fun of the Aegis part in it...it's Naval-based...


What's in the area? Oh yeah...the Navy...



They dont have the supplies or the logistical means to do so........they dont have the means to feed a fighting army......


Or gas enough for the tanks...at least not enough to get back.


No, the real threat from them would come from terror-type attacks. The other thing about them, is that in order to take action for them, we'd have to PROVE a NK connection. That's where the real danger lies.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I don't think it'll be the cakewalk everyone seems to think it's going to be. Even under ideal conditions the Aegis missile systems will knock out a fairly large chunk of anything headed towards north america or anywhere else. But they can still overwhelm your defenses. As for taking on NK in a conventional war, sure, the US would have air superiority but at a cost. In a land war, that's a different beast all together. Unlike Iraq, which is made for tank battles, NK is hilly and mountainous. So there will be no tanks charging. Add in the fact that NK has about 8000 artillery pieces, bunkers that are resistant to bunker buster bombs/nuclear/biological and most have their own factories for either building new or refurbishing weapons (these include tanks, APC's, planes, etc.). This wouldn't be a quick decisive win for the US, this will be dragged out.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by PLAYERONE01
 





BTW, your still in the middle east fighting goat farmers, this guy has a real army.


Goat farmers are better fed then his army.......how long do you think they could really go to war for?

They dont have the supplies or the logistical means to do so........they dont have the means to feed a fighting army......

One of the first rules in warfare is to be able to supply your army.......they simply dont have the means......

Its not feasible for him to commit to any kind of strike, period......


Ok... I dont know if this is arrogance or just pure ignorance.

1. You know nothing about north korea's capabilities, strategies or tactics, noone does, yet you pretend you do - how arrogant is that? (btw... one simple and very easy thing to do, is just to walk 28 miles, capture seoul and have all the supplies you need. Its not like Russia, you dont have a killer winter and 4000 miles to walk... Makes it real simple. Its a tactic used for over... well since humans started throwing rocks at each other...)

2. Look at the video. Does his army seem ... malnourished? Starving? Suffering any kind of... lack of motivation?



Last time I've seen something with that kind of discipline I think it was nazi germany... and well... you know...

3. You underestimate your enemy. Specially serious when you're enemy is oriental. Guess vietnamese farmers didnt teach you anything... and you know how the saying goes, "if you dont learn from history..."

4. Conventional warfare - invasion scenario. The reserves will be called. they have 1.2 million active personnel. plus 8 million reserves. 8 million active reserves. Really.

5. Table turners - without nuclear war - bio and chem warfare - the north has A LOT. South has none - only has gas masks. Tunnels. SK has more north korean tunnels beneath them then they have ants. Seoul could turn ugly really really fast.

6. North's Natural defenses. The north has EVERYTHING underground - everything. And the topography only allows for certain planes to fly on those mountains - and those planes arent the "new ones" - lets say an F22 cant really excel on that terrain and something more agile like a 21 or 23 are more fit for it. Not to mention AAs behind each damn tree. M1s dont climb mountains. On the other hand NK has some weird vehicles specially design for that terrain.

7. They're a very very motivated army. Someone once said they were a mix of the ruthlessness of russians and the courage, disciple and motivation of the german SS.

This is my opinion of course. Some comments I see about north korea are so childish sometimes I think people here are talking about a new video game or some movie. We dont know how they think. Orientals have a very different way of looking at life, death, war etc than us westerners. I wouldnt underestimate North Korea.
edit on 27-3-2013 by FraternitasSaturni because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I know that this is a slightly derailing question but I noticed that there were several posters who mentioned suitcase nukes.

If NK were to use one of those and keep quiet about it... who would the US blame? NK or Iran? Of course I have the feeling that Un would fall all over people on the way to a microphone to announce how his godliness destroyed America.

BTW. I worry more for the poor people of Seoul because in reality, they really don't stand a chance being so close.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I know that this is a slightly derailing question but I noticed that there were several posters who mentioned suitcase nukes.

If NK were to use one of those and keep quiet about it... who would the US blame? NK or Iran? Of course I have the feeling that Un would fall all over people on the way to a microphone to announce how his godliness destroyed America.

BTW. I worry more for the poor people of Seoul because in reality, they really don't stand a chance being so close.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


That's the fun of the Aegis part in it...it's Naval-based...


What's in the area? Oh yeah...the Navy...



They dont have the supplies or the logistical means to do so........they dont have the means to feed a fighting army......


Or gas enough for the tanks...at least not enough to get back.


No, the real threat from them would come from terror-type attacks. The other thing about them, is that in order to take action for them, we'd have to PROVE a NK connection. That's where the real danger lies.


lots of scenarios are possible, even NK launching a missile/bios towards russia with US logos and designs incorporated into the missile, then suddenly you have a mess. bio agents can be delivered for decades by patriots to the NK govt. etc. etc. the list goes on but as i mentioned earlier in this thread no one knows anything for certain, about what going on. for all we know the NK govt. has been working for the cia for decades and this is just fear mongering to keep US citizens in line. 1000s of what if's but none of them amount to a hill of beans.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FraternitasSaturni
 


American Arrogance checking in for duty! And the same 1-7 can be stated for you as well or are you the official Military Mastermind in charge of the U.S? No? That's what I thought?~ Truth is nobody know's what's about to happen. Guestimation's are the only logical deduction's and from your post your making N.K to sound like a monster to be feared.

I never knew N.K to be a sleeping Giant~



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedShirt73
I don't think it'll be the cakewalk everyone seems to think it's going to be. Even under ideal conditions the Aegis missile systems will knock out a fairly large chunk of anything headed towards north america or anywhere else. But they can still overwhelm your defenses.


In order to overwhelm, you have to have the numbers on your side. So far, at least as far a long range missiles are concerned, their numbers are rather dismal, and what they have tested, does not have a very good track record.



As for taking on NK in a conventional war, sure, the US would have air superiority but at a cost.


That's why you don't send your jets in right away. You send things that are harder to hit, but that in turn can hit really hard. For example: fully armed drones, cruise missiles, high altitude stealth bombing. Then you start sending in your jets.



In a land war, that's a different beast all together. Unlike Iraq, which is made for tank battles, NK is hilly and mountainous. So there will be no tanks charging.


Why send in tanks? Or personnel for that mater? At least at first, there would be no reason too. You'd use them in defense on the SK side of things, while using those pesky drones and again, AC130s. Nasty thing to have circling over you.



Add in the fact that NK has about 8000 artillery pieces, bunkers that are resistant to bunker buster bombs/nuclear/biological and most have their own factories for either building new or refurbishing weapons (these include tanks, APC's, planes, etc.).


You are correct. Which is why you'd just seal them in. And then continue to do so. If they dig out? Do it again. Food, air and water will only last so long.

It could drag out for quite a while, but only if we let it.
edit on 27-3-2013 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by PLAYERONE01
 



So how many Americans are prepared to be Nuked or Chem' bombed to wipe out North Korea?

"I swear to God your honor he was going to hit me so I hit him back-- first."

You should have just said, "How many Americans are prepared to wipe out North Korea?"

You are threatening them.



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by PLAYERONE01

Originally posted by Druscilla

It's a long way from NK to US.
Any missile headed toward the US would need run a gauntlet of missile defense systems.

NK could certainly try to slow boat a launcher into short range from international waters. but, even then, there'd be time for intercept.

Sure, there's the whole conspiracy theory favorite buzz-word "false flag" to consider, as far as some ordinance slipping through the defense net, but, this happening is far more likely with a more conveniently sacrificial target that isn't necessarily so close to home.

It'd be foolish for NK to fire any nukes at anyone. It'd be immediate suicide. No one would need respond with nukes in return either. Conventional arms would be enough, and in the end, NK would be dissolved as a non-nation, divided up between China and South Korea with reparations in store for anyone accruing damage from the mess.

NK would be committing suicide if it simply tired conventional warfare.
So long as it held nukes in reserve, it might be able to deescalate a losing position, through bargaining, but, even then, little Kimmy could kiss whatever lifestyle he's use to goodbye in exchange for spider holes until he eventually gets got.

NK is making noise, like they always do, and their noise serves as being useful idiots.
So long as they're making noise, US/UN can justifiably move assets all over the planet that would otherwise raise eyebrows and concern among other nations.

No matter what NK says or does at this point, it's going to, and already is benefiting the US.
NK has already lost.

Their best move in this political theater is to shut up, close the windows, lock the doors, and curl into a tight little ball until everyone forgets about them in the face of some other world event.




Hmmm interesting, I applaud you for giving us a demonstration so early on Druscilla of the arrogance I was explaining. lol, amazing. its around 7000-8000 klms from the northern most part of North Korea to say Seattle and maybe L.A. but hey we dont really know what they have in store, but as long as your bullet proof ego's keep you going, it will make great TV if it all goes down.
BTW, your still in the middle east fighting goat farmers, this guy has a real army.





It sounds like you're almost wishing for an attack on U.S. soil judging by your rhetoric.

I don't believe her bullet proof ego has anything to do with the aforementioned missile defense systems and other defense systems that are in place.

Keep in mind, in the 1990's, the U.S. military budget was several times that of the next 10 countries combined.

Let that stew for a moment.

The U.S. has sent men to the Moon, rovers to Mars, satellites that are now leaving the local Solar system.

Yes, N.K. does have WMD's, but a WMD does not mean a country is going to let one off, let alone in the U.S. It's all probabilities, and when you consider counter intelligence, you get the idea..
edit on 27-3-2013 by 1Providence1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Some of the newer bunker-busting technologies are pretty downright scary...

I'm pretty sure the MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator) would get at most targets... (penetration of 61m)
A second MOP most certainly would. Most NK main bunkers are said to have around 80m of top rock (and that's likely an exaggeration). 122m would do the trick.
edit on 27-3-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join