North Korea goes full retard

Zhaun_sl

shitlord
2,568
2
Once again, no one wants war with North Korea because after they lose, which we know they will, the reconstruction and humanitarian effort of the aftermath will be so massive that no one wants to deal with it. No one has the money, manpower or desire to dig all these millions and millions of people out of their hole. Especially when many are so out of their minds with indoctrination they probably don't want help.

This is what people fear, the clean up, far more than the actual war.
 

Lenas

Trump's Staff
7,498
2,239
Just force them to reunite the Koreas and have the South worry about it. </joke>
 

Karloff_sl

shitlord
907
1
right I said "for a long peroid of time" 1945-2004 I believe qualifies as a "long period of time". You bricked your slam dunk.

I read that in the cia world fact book 10 years ago, but nice to know it was "alex jones"
Prior to 1996 any exports of Alaksa oil were banned, so according to Alex Jones the CIA was selling oil from Alaska in large quantities? Do you have any citations for this?
 

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
Just force them to reunite the Koreas and have the South worry about it. </joke>
There is a good argument for reunification because South Korea is entering an era of decadence. They will be Japan 2.0 if they don't do something quick. Basically, too many old people and not enough people in the lower demographic. Starving Koreans will work for cheap labour and that in return will fund old people's pensions. It's gonna be shit for the middle class but chaebols will prosper even more.

YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
 

agripa

Molten Core Raider
591
520
Where are you pulling this info?
The telegraph a conservative British newspaper.

Toshimitsu Shigemura, a professor at Tokyo's Waseda University and an expert on North Korean affairs, agrees that Kim is looking to intimidate his enemies rather than start a war.

"In truth, the North does not have the capability to wage war at the moment as they only have around 400,000 tonnes of oil for their military, meaning they can't fight," he told The Telegraph.

"The country is also unstable and Kim's grip is not so strong at the moment," he said. "It's very likely that his military leaders are engaged in a power struggle and they need a certain level of tension to maintain their own control."
 

Itzena_sl

shitlord
4,609
6
This is a good read for an analysis of NK's offensive capabilities.

http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-...c-and-reality/

tl;dr NK cant turn Seoul into a "Sea of Fire" without going full nuclear/bio/chem. Artillery gets degraded at 1% an hour. SK fighters kill 270 targets per sortie (more with US planes). Even if NK is starts up a ground war they have 3 valleys to attack Seoul through which narrow to 1km at certain points. Assuming they achieve victory on the ground, they still have 60 days max to reach Busan and conquer the peninsula before they totally run out of fuel. Also, they have not practiced the large scale maneuvers and logistics to pull off such a feat in over 50 years. Guess what nation is super experienced at moving large amounts of men and material anywhere in the world quickly.
Who's talking about a ground war? I'm talking about NK throwing everything they've got at Seoul so they can kill as many people as possible before they get wiped out themselves.
 

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
72,014
213,304
are n korean women hot? if so maybe it wouldnt be so bad if we got some new hot bitches around here. when the USSR collapsed we got tons of those burly middle eastern chicks during the 90s. couldnt go to a strip bar because these hogmonsters were everywhere.
 

Famm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
11,041
794
NK would be able to fire off an initial salvo but counter battery radar means that each gun only fires once and then its destroyed by SK arty. Though you really have to question the state of their equipment, its easy to make something look functional but I wonder how many of their guns really work and if they even have the ammunition/manpower to utilize working guns.
Anyone else think its likely that the whole situation will one day simply fizzle out more like East Germany/Berlin Wall/Cold War style? I imagine someday they effectively surrender or go through massive military defection as a result of famine or some such conditions. Then we get to watch all the pictures of the DMZ and other military gear getting hauled off for dismantling and we find out that as much as one or two thirds of it wasn't even operational and the amount of shells were vastly over estimated as well. I'm largely talking out of my ass, that last sentence could be completely misguided. But as mentioned, no one wants to be responsible for the "nation building" of this mess afterwords. I'd say it has to fall to reunification, especially if NK were to go out with a whimper like this.
 

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
It can't fizzle out that way. East Germans were still germans. They weren't the one true germans, they were germans. Same as the guys on the other side of the wall.

That was a nation occupied by a foreign power. This is a nation occupied by itself.

You would think that the feudal power structure in place is ultimately untenable. And it probably is. Waiting them out is dangerous though, because each tantrum the aristocracy throws in order to maintain power HAS to be more violent than the previous one. That's just the cycle they're in.

I think it will eventually end with a border skirmish gone too far, seoul on fire, north korea carpetbombed and occupied by south korean troops, and an ongoing clusterfuck in the U.N. as China is forced to take responsibility for the land.
 

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
are n korean women hot? if so maybe it wouldnt be so bad if we got some new hot bitches around here. when the USSR collapsed we got tons of those burly middle eastern chicks during the 90s. couldnt go to a strip bar because these hogmonsters were everywhere.
if you are into fucking a skeleton with strips of dried out skin, why not.
 

agripa

Molten Core Raider
591
520
7qkocFA.jpg
 

Northerner

N00b
921
9
Probably thinking for SK.

Still, counter artillery is a goddamned fool's game. It makes sense for navies simply because your state is pretty binary (floating or not) but for cities and military fortifications you just end up spreading the damage around for the most part. Besides, that shit costs money and money can buy other military systems that provide much better results.
 

Ko Dokomo_sl

shitlord
478
1
Who's talking about a ground war? I'm talking about NK throwing everything they've got at Seoul so they can kill as many people as possible before they get wiped out themselves.
Read the article. He goes through the calculations on how many people in Seoul could be killed by a surprise artillery barrage in the middle of the day. Given the preponderance of shelters and high awareness and training in Seoul, NK can produce maybe 25,000 casualties in the first strike, and then dropping off drastically as people get under cover. If they want to go for "sea of fire" as I said, they have to go NBC, which means an all out ground war retaliation, which means they have to go all in with their own ground assault to try and blitz a win. Thus, NK has to commit everything and pray for a miracle or make empty threats and try to die another day, every day.