US considering Preemptive Strike against North Korea.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I just hope the Americans appreciate the move by North Korea and talk about US troop redrawal from the South.

Why the insisting on American withdrawal ,

With china pulling the strings in NK you would think the opposite ,

But we know china will never allow anything meaningful to happen ,

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

They will sit quietly and say something along the lines they want to see the denuking of the peninsula , while helping accelerating NKs nuclear program

I could see genuine denuclearization if the US removed it militarily from the region.

Manic Moran

The argument that the combination of low tech and high tech systems gives DPRK forces an advantage reminds me a bit of the argument by German commanders in 1944 that they had an advantage over the allies should they invade France because the German military was predominantly horse drawn. The allies would be constrained by their need to transport petrol to and around France, whist German logistical requirements could be met by grazing in the local field.

That didn't quite work out as hoped.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I could see genuine denuclearization if the US removed it militarily from the region.

But china needs and wants nuclear NK even more so with the claiming of whole south China sea .

And south Korea isn't stupid either they know china would jump at the chance to walk over them.

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

Why the insisting on American withdrawal ,

With china pulling the strings in NK you would think the opposite ,

But we know china will never allow anything meaningful to happen ,

Nonsense South Korea is not a threat to China if US military removes itself. Meaningful peace is denuclearization and US troop removal from South Korea.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Nonsense South Korea is not a threat to China if US military removes itself.

A unified korea is a economic and military threat to China along with democratic governance ,

It wasn't America who started the Korean war now was if ,

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

But china needs and wants nuclear NK even more so with the claiming of whole south China sea .

And south Korea isn't stupid either they know china would jump at the chance to walk over them.

China can fight its own battles it doesn't need North Korea. I be very surprised if China does not welcome this move.

Richard Hillman

The only question now is where in the oval office will Trumpy hang his Nobel Peace prize

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

China can fight its own battles it doesn't need North Korea

Yes they do need North Korea as a buffer to both America and a unified korea ,

Why do you think the likes of Vietnam are inviting America to work together now ,
You will eventually see new US facilities opening over their

aloyisious

Gatling wrote: »

Kim to meet Donald in the next couple of weeks ,that's an interesting development

It's the how, where and when it'll be arranged by that'll count before it becomes just another "fake" story. Where could the two meet that'd be seen as neutral ground, UN in NY - or Switzerland, seeing as Kim was schooled there.

Gatling

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The only question now is where in the oval office will Trumpy hang his Nobel Peace prize

He could even win the best actor Oscar next year ,
The court jester that removed the NK threat after 6 decades pure Hollywood

4068ac1elhodqr

Kim Jong Un is to meet with Donald Trump by May, was Barry O' ever able to arrange a hang out with Kim?

Other key points:

North Korea will "refrain from future missile tests"
South Korea's security adviser says the North Korean leader is "committed to denuclearisation"

DEFTLEFTHAND

Jesus Kim has got even fatter than I remembered him, has a head like a watermelon.

Maybe himself and Donald should take out a gym membership together and become workout buddies.

Kermit.de.frog

Is Ads by Google an Ad by Google?:eek:

So what's the spin this time? He's doing it so he can build golf courses or something? I reckon it will take roughly three hours for someone to say he's in North Korea's pocket.

As usual, /r/politics is a goldmine.

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/832fzl/trump_accepts_kim_jonguns_invitation_to_meet_over/

It's amazing how these people call Trump a retard whilst displaying the political acumen of an exhausted wombat.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Chrongen wrote: »

Rather nicely put. A refreshing retort to the "Russia have GPS's sellotaped to the dashboards of their coal powered MiGs" or other such crap.

I love listening to pro-American bluster and arrogance. It never gets old. Even wanker comedians like Dennis Miller would stand there and crack some super joke like "How do you tell an "Eye-Raki" war hero?...He's the one who waits 10 seconds before surrendering! Hur Hur! " Not long after that Iraqi resistance fighters fought to the death against 10,000 US Marines in Falujah.

Go wipe your nose Miller.
Even the British, and I know a few who have been over in that pathetic conflict, loathe with venom the Americans they are forced to deal with.

Gatling.....there's a new scientific breakthrough in (anywhere outside of Washington).

Gatling: "Our stuff will wipe that stuff out. They are useless thickos who still rely on alchemy.

Mod note: Chrongen, don't post in this thread again,

Buford T. Justice

Manic Moran

Manic Moran wrote: »

The argument that the combination of low tech and high tech systems gives DPRK forces an advantage reminds me a bit of the argument by German commanders in 1944 that they had an advantage over the allies should they invade France because the German military was predominantly horse drawn. The allies would be constrained by their need to transport petrol to and around France, whist German logistical requirements could be met by grazing in the local field.

That didn't quite work out as hoped.

By 1944? German forces had very little room to maneuver by the end of the war, fighting mostly for urban areas. Seems an odd statement for any German commander to make.

There are plenty of examples where less advanced weaponry has trumped over more advanced systems.

https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-paradox-of-military-technology

"None of the most sophisticated surface-to-air missiles, such as Russia’s double-digit SAMs (SA-10, SA-15, SA-20), was available to Iraq, Serbia, Afghanistan, or other states that the U.S. has fought in recent years, but they are being sold to other customers, including China, Vietnam, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Greece, and Cyprus. So are shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles such as the American FIM-92 Stinger, British Starstreak, French Mistral, Chinese Qianwei-2, and the Russian SA-7 Grail, SA-14 Gremlin, SA-16 Gimlet, and SA-18 Grouse. There are at least 100,000 such systems in the arsenals of over 100 states and at least 13 non-state groups such as Hezbollah, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and the Tamil Tigers. The best models have a range of 23,000 feet.

The potential of hand-carried missiles was demonstrated in the 1980s when Stingers took a significant toll on Soviet aircraft in Afghanistan. The threat is sufficient for the U.S. to rely increasingly on unmanned drones for high-risk missions and to mandate that manned aircraft in war zones stay above 15,000 or 20,000 feet. SAMs pose an especially great threat to helicopters, which don’t have the option of flying that high, and for airplanes taking off or landing. Three cargo aircraft leaving Baghdad International Airport have been seriously damaged by missiles, and, while all of them survived, several U.S. helicopters hit with SAMs in Iraq and Afghanistan did not. An Israeli jetliner was almost shot down in Mombasa, Kenya, in 2002 by al Qaeda operatives firing an SA-7. Only the terrorists’ targeting error prevented the deaths of 271 passengers and crew. Other civilian airliners are sure to be less lucky."

In all honesty, I don't believe that N.Korea could stall the US for very long in a conventional war... but I don't believe it would be a conventional war. It would be fighting in the towns/cities where the US reliance on Artillery/air support would be extremely limited. The advantage of technology is limited when talking about ground fighting in Urban areas since it comes down to the soldiers themselves, and the US has a horror of large casualties which taking cities tend to generate.

However, even after all that, Kim could just disappear and run the country from abroad. The US would need to take him and show him off to the world to be successful. To dismantle the regime and bring glorious freedomt to N.Koreans. But Kim is just as likely to skip across the border and take residence in China, and nobody is going to force China to do anything it doesn't want to. With Kim working from exile, N.Koreans would likely continue to resist any occupation generating even higher cost in life. Even assuming that the US led forces could be successful, which doesn't seem likely considering their lack of success in Afghanistan, Iraq etc.

Richard Hillman

Beijing will be the location. Kim will defect.

Gatling

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Beijing will be the location. Kim will defect.

Followed rapidly by a massive land grab of large parts of NK by china

Hande hoche!

Will heartily laugh if Trump joins Obama in winning a Nobel peace prize.

Bob24

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Will heartily laugh if Trump joins Obama in winning a Nobel peace prize.

The prize which was about telling Obama how he was expected to behave rather than rewarding previous achievements? (And that Obama himself was a bit embarrassed about)

I don’t think any major political leader wants that but yeah that’d be funny :-)

BorneTobyWilde

What if Kim is just luring him in for the kill. Russian are doing it all the time, killing off people who they don't want around. The security will be huge, Trump will be told not eat drink or touch anything that is not from his own team.

Cheerful Spring

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The only question now is where in the oval office will Trumpy hang his Nobel Peace prize

Trump willingness to talk with the leader of North Korea is a good thing but let us not get ahead of oneself its early days. Trump stance on the Iran issue is still problematic and he siding with other villains in the middle east notably Saudi Arabia and Isreal.

America has to negotiate in good faith for the North Korean nuclear crisis to end. Demanding nuclearization and keeping US military in South Korea will not solve the problem. There is a long way to go before claiming Trump deserves a Nobel peace reward, but like I said Trump is doing the right thing having a face to face chat with the guy who runs the show in North Korea.

Cheerful Spring

Gatling wrote: »

Followed rapidly by a massive land grab of large parts of NK by china

There will be no talk of unification. Don and Kim likely will be only talking about denuclearization and the security of North Korea. Kim has not signalled his stepping down from power

Cheerful Spring

Deleted User wrote: »

By 1944? German forces had very little room to maneuver by the end of the war, fighting mostly for urban areas. Seems an odd statement for any German commander to make.

There are plenty of examples where less advanced weaponry has trumped over more advanced systems.

https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-paradox-of-military-technology

By 1944 the Germany army was exhausted from the fighting in the East battling insurgents and the Soviet Union. It was not possible for the German army to defend Western Europe. If Hitler and his generals removed troops from the Soviet Union the lines would be manned by fewer men to defend. Hitler strategically got it wrong be joining the war against America and opening up a new more strong front against him from the west. It was only matter of time after that Hitler would be defeated. If Hitler had kept up the pressure on England eventually they would have collapsed and Americans would not have had a base inside Europe to operate out from.

I think Vietnam war is a modern example of a village army beating a superpower. The terrain of Vietnam was a hindrance and US troops often got ambushed and caught out and retreated. It was easy to beat the Iraqi army as the Iraqi landscape is mostly sand, tiny villages, and tiny hills your view is not obscured by the air and land, so Iraqi army was sitting ducks. North Korea is very mountainous the American army would have to fight in conditions very similar to Afghanistan Tora Bora region, so any ground war/invasion will take many months if not a year to complete.

Cheerful Spring

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

By 1944 the Germany army was exhausted from the fighting in the East battling insurgents and the Soviet Union. It was not possible for the German army to defend Western Europe. If Hitler and his generals removed troops from the Soviet Union the lines would be manned by fewer men to defend. Hitler strategically got it wrong be joining the war against America and opening up a new more strong front against him from the west. It was only matter of time after that Hitler would be defeated. If Hitler had kept up the pressure on England eventually they would have collapsed and Americans would not have had a base inside Europe to operate out from.

Ahh I disagree here. On the western front, the Wehrmacht and the SS had capable divisions (understrength but often veterans), and good commanders on hand to repel the invasion. They had the plans in place to throw the allies back into the sea (with three battle strength panzer groups nearby) and could have seriously blocked their advances numerous times during the early stages of the Normandy landings. The problem was the conflicting orders from Hitler who spread them too wide or ordered them to return to Berlin for silly reasons and then sent them back piecemeal...

I think Vietnam wae is a modern example of a village army beating a superpower. The terrain of Vietnam was a hindrance and US troops often got ambushed and caught out and retreated. It was easy to beat the Iraqi army as the Iraqi landscape is mostly sand, tiny villages, and tiny hills your view is not obscured by the air and land, so Iraqi army was sitting ducks. North Korea is very mountainous the American army would have to fight in conditions very similar to Afghanistan Tora Bora region, so any ground war/invasion will take many months if not a year to complete.

Agreed... and the N.Koreans have had plenty of time to prepare the terrain for whatever style of warfare they choose to follow.

cnocbui

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

What if Kim is just luring him in for the kill. Russian are doing it all the time, killing off people who they don't want around. The security will be huge, Trump will be told not eat drink or touch anything that is not from his own team.

I don't think Putin is going to thank him for killing off his agent in the White house. No one would dare lay a finger on Putin's puppet, he's safe and needn't worry about the food or drink.

Bob24

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

What if Kim is just luring him in for the kill. Russian are doing it all the time, killing off people who they don't want around. The security will be huge, Trump will be told not eat drink or touch anything that is not from his own team.

It would be a movie like development, but very unlikely.

I know it’s Kim but still ... what would be the point in doing that? I assume US military protocol pretty much is that if there is a clear attempt/success by a foreign nation to kill the commander in chief, the next step is war.

But having said that yes there is a Pedro if unpredictability and it will obviously have to be treated as a very high risk situation - whoever is in charge of Trump’s safety is in for a stressful time.

Cheerful Spring

Deleted User wrote: »

Ahh I disagree here. On the western front, the Wehrmacht and the SS had capable divisions (understrength but often veterans), and good commanders on hand to repel the invasion. They had the plans in place to throw the allies back into the sea (with three battle strength panzer groups nearby) and could have seriously blocked their advances numerous times during the early stages of the Normandy landings. The problem was the conflicting orders from Hitler who spread them too wide or ordered them to return to Berlin for silly reasons and then sent them back piecemeal...

Still, Hitler could not call upon his entire army to defend France. A lot of fit and able-bodied German troops are still fighting in the east, that would have been used, to stop the advancing allies. France was relatively peaceful up till D-Day. The French Coastline was guarded by German Garrison troops, maybe not experienced enough to stop a fully-fledged allied assault? The biggest problem on D-Day is the German Luftwaffe could not operate at will anymore. The RAF and the American airforce dominated the air. German panzer tanks could have driven towards Normandy but they could have been sitting ducks for allied bombers and fighter jets if spotted by them from the air. Germans were not prepared for a two-front war and lack of air cover it was over for them.