North Korea v USA Mega Merge.

smileyj1987

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

Equium

Does this mean we get more iodine tablets in the post?

smileyj1987

Equium wrote: »

Does this mean we get more iodine tablets in the post?

Enda Kenny and Co will be charging top whack for them .

P_1

Feck, there goes the TEFL in South Korea plan I suppose

Jimoslimos

I don't think the US would launch a nuclear attack, not unless by some incredible twist of fate NK actually managed to pull off an attack on US soil. Highly unlikely.

Probable target would be Seoul, which even with best anti-missile defences stands a high chance of success. The US though would retaliate with conventional missile attacks, which would be more than sufficient to do the job.

Still I reckon this is bluster, if they had intended to attack they would have cancelled pacts minutes before missile launch - not give SK and the US time to organise defences.

BrianG23

I think NK are just pushing their balls around again. I mean look at this http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=203_1360053143 All propaganda BS over there. However it really it getting too far at this point imo.

Cork boy 55

Somewhere over the Pacific tonight

In this clip of Stanley Kubrick's classic 1964 film "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb," our heroes receive their coded instructions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-KIAsuoMAQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ynY5NvYsZY

Celly Smunt

I'm going to bed,it would be nice to wake up tomorrow to no more north Korea.

bizmark

JJayoo wrote: »

I think that is such a pile of piss

I take the word of american military predictions over your feelings any day though btw if you want a really nice example of someone targeting civilians look up the rape of Nanking thats a concentrated horror show costing the lives of more people than the 2 nukes that ended a world war and for no reason what so ever.

I do not weep for the destruction of nazi or empire of japan citys

old_aussie

Kim Jong-un....."when I said Nuke the Chinese, I meant, put the left-overs in the microwave"

Hammar

North Korea is best Korea.

Jimoslimos

bizmark wrote: »

I take the word of american military predictions over your feelings any day though btw if you want a really nice example of someone targeting civilians look up the rape of Nanking thats a concentrated horror show costing the lives of more people than the 2 nukes that ended a world war and for no reason what so ever.

I do not weep for the destruction of nazi or empire of japan citys

American military predictions eh? Because they've been shown to be absolutely spot on everytime haven't they?

At no stage in this thread did anyone attempt to apologise for Nazi or Japanese actions during WWII. Two wrongs don't make a right however and just because your enemy indulges in some horrific behaviour (of which the Japanese were very guilty) doesn't give you the same.

P_1

Strategically it would be suicide for North Korea to do anything of the sort at the moment.

They don't have any allies and have a finite set of resources that can't possibly come near to competing with any of their perceived enemies.

They might have a shot if they took ourselves on but thankfully we are out of their range.

bizmark

Jimoslimos wrote: »

American military predictions eh? Because they've been shown to be absolutely spot on everytime haven't they?

At no stage in this thread did anyone attempt to apologise for Nazi or Japanese actions during WWII. Two wrongs don't make a right however and just because your enemy indulges in some horrific behaviour (of which the Japanese were very guilty) doesn't give you the same.

Your agrument makes no sense unless your basically saying the military of the day should of ignored their advisors and predictions because they might be wrong on the level of carnage inflicted on their men because....er i don't know ? why would they why would they say "well we might lose up to 4 million people and we have ample proof of how fanitical the japanise are but someone on the internet in the future might think it was wrong so best put away the wonder weapons and throw away our children in this fight because gosh darn im just a really stupid person.

The real world doesn't work like that

Jimoslimos

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

The band is named after the unit/term
It is an actual unit/term from the cold war
Megadeath is a term for one million deaths by nuclear explosion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megadeath

I can't stop trivialising the matter in my head to the loss of a few Korean heavy metal tribute bands, which would be devastating given that nothing would then stand in the way of K-Pop

Jimoslimos

bizmark wrote: »

Your agrument makes no sense unless your basically saying the military of the day should of ignored their advisors and predictions because they might be wrong on the level of carnage inflicted on their men because....er i don't know ? why would they why would they say "well we might lose up to 4 million people and we have ample proof of how fanitical the japanise are but someone on the internet in the future might think it was wrong so best put away the wonder weapons and throw away our children in this fight because gosh darn im just a really stupid person.

The real world doesn't work like that

Why was a land invasion the only other option? An island nation with limited natural resources losing ground in East Asia with minimal air defences. Continued conventional bomber attacks would have been effective eventually - with fewer civilian casualties

No, the US military were desperate to justify the millions they spent developing their shiny new toy. Hence the wild exaggerations of projected casualties if they didn't get their way.

old_aussie

Jimoslimos wrote: »

No, the US military were desperate to justify the millions they spent developing their shiny new toy. Hence the wild exaggerations of projected casualties if they didn't get their way.

The Japs started it and the Yanks finished it.

Saved possible 100,000's of allied lives.

Japan would have fought till the last man standing, costing possible millions of Jap lives.

bizmark

So your choice would of been mass starvation through naval blockade and continued massive areal bombardment possibly killing 100's of thousands anyway? assuming the russians didnt swing in from manchuria and invade in the meantime either way death and hardship was to be hand in great numbers plus the entire atomic bomb cost was 2 billion dollars at the time in comparison the 24 essex class carriers would of cost a combined 1.9 billion this wasnt some huge expenditure comparatively.

Though i would say they used it in part to warn the russians along with saving their own soldiers and bring the war to an end all of which is A ok in my book

We be hugely off topic now mind

NTMK

you mean like the General of the Army, the chief of staff to the president, the head of intelligence for Japan and the commander of the pacific fleet who all disagreed with the use of the nuclear weapons

"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman

P_1

NTMK wrote: »

you mean like the General of the Army, the chief of staff to the president, the head of intelligence for Japan and the commander of the pacific fleet who all disagreed with the use of the nuclear weapons

"The use of [the atomic bombs] at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons... The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to President Truman

The nukes were never about beating Japan, as you said by that stage they were done. The reason for using them was to warn the Soviets off

bizmark

We can all quote people to back up our point of view

History professor Robert James Maddox wrote:
"Another myth that has attained wide attention is that at least several of Truman's top military advisers later informed him that using atomic bombs against Japan would be militarily unnecessary or immoral, or both. There is no persuasive evidence that any of them did so. None of the Joint Chiefs ever made such a claim, although one inventive author has tried to make it appear that Leahy did by braiding together several unrelated passages from the admiral's memoirs. Actually, two days after Hiroshima, Truman told aides that Leahy had 'said up to the last that it wouldn't go off.'
Neither MacArthur nor Nimitz ever communicated to Truman any change of mind about the need for invasion or expressed reservations about using the bombs

Jimoslimos

old_aussie wrote: »

The Japs started it and the Yanks finished it.

Saved possible 100,000's of allied lives.

Japan would have fought till the last man standing, costing possible millions of Jap lives.

I don't believe that they had the stomach to keep fighting. Humans are generally pragmatic in times of war and self-survival kicks in pretty quickly.

Not much different to wartime bluster shown by most leaders, including Churchill's "we'll fight them on the beaches". In the face of overwhelming odds of defeat everybody surrenders eventually.

SeantheMan

Anyone on her working in S.Korea atm ? , maybe they can enlighten us as to the feeling in the country at present ? , if they're not to busy listening to k-pop

Killer Wench

Look at the Huffington Post right now and you will see that the headline stories focus on Rand Paul's old fashion filibuster, President Clinton decrying DOMA, critiquing the Drone Policy, and Justin Beiber fainting. We care more about Beiber fainting than we do NK's silly attempts to get our attention.

AllGunsBlazing

I guess this means the north Korean regime has run out of money again. They pull this crap every time they want another hand out.

I hope enda is taking notes.

SeantheMan

AllGunsBlazing wrote: »

I guess this means the north Korean regime has run out of money again. They pull this crap every time they want another hand out.

I hope enda is taking notes.

Well that is the last thing that will happen considering what the UN sanctions yesterday were

The proposed sanctions North Korea called an "act of war" (summarized from here ), which the Security Council passed a few hours later:
-Ban on exporting luxury goods to North Korea (intended to target goods used by North Korea's elite)
-Freeze on all North Korean money thought to be connected to missile programs
-Ban on financial support for anything related to missile programs
-Travel sanctions that would effectively force out all expats working for North Korean ventures
-All North Korean cargo must be inspected
-3 arms dealers and 2 international organizations have been specifically targeted and sanctioned (from here )

Hank Scorpio

will be broadband be ok if it happens? if so go ahead lads

It's time to call........

kraggy

SeantheMan wrote: »

Anyone on her working in S.Korea atm ? , maybe they can enlighten us as to the feeling in the country at present ? , if they're not to busy listening to k-pop

Life continuing as usual.

mconigol

Can we have an embargo on media reporting anything about North Korea too?