Rex Tillerson 3-17-2017
>Efforts for North Korea to achieve a peaceful stability for the last two decades have failed to make us safe. Let me be very clear: the policy of strategic patience has ended. We are exploring a new range of diplomatic, security, economic measures. All options are on the table.
>koreaherald.com
Preemptive strike on N. Korea an option
>abcnews.go.com
S. Korean creating safety drills incase of N. Korean attack
>reuters.com
Other urls found in this thread:
koreaherald.com
myredditnudes.com
twitter.com
Couple of questions:
First, if the war goes hot, and by hot I mean nuclear, would the US target strategic sites or would it be total annihilation? If threatened would the Norks go for the Samson option or would they target US bases in S.Korea and Japan?
If the war is conventional, would the Russians and Chink supply best Korea with toys or would they back the fuck off?
Honestly, I think that if it were apparent that N. Korea was going to go hot with nukes, China would step in and dethrone Kim-Jung to stave off a massive refugee problem and possible escalations with the west.
But China has been intrested in the south China sea for a while now, perhaps they are pushing for this so they can destabilize the American influence in the area so they can achieve hegemony in the far east?
Maybe they don't want to risk the 40,000 marines in okinawa making landfall in their capitol cities.
Here comes the war. Luckily he has chosen the worlds 4th largest army to go up against, across the most heavily fortified and mined DMZ the world has ever seen into the most heavily fortified positions the world has ever seen, where 70% of that army is in positions prepared for just this, and where 80% of those 70% of the army is so fortified they even have underground hardened shelters for entire divisions. In a terrain that doesnt lend itself easily to tank warfare, under the densest anti-air umbrella in the world, into the welcoming arms of soldiers who are more brain-washed and less in touch with the world outside than ISIS. Against a nation who has the nuke, upwards of 30.000 artillery pieces in range of Seoul suburbs, attack subs, and who has a 200.000 strong special ops force who's sole purpose is to infiltrate into Japan and SouthKorea and create maximum havoc against them and american interests there.
If by lucky, you mean the chinese proverb; may you live in interesting times.
This one's going to get nastier than anything I've seen in my lifetime. Wonder if the Presidential Order to reinstate the draft is ready to be signed yet....You trump fanboys aching to get your order to deploy?
It would be a massive gamble, if they did.
US has many allies in the region, and if N. Korea was to be hit, causing refugees to flee, it would be very bad for China's already fragile economy.
Also, attacking someone's ally generally acts as a uniting event and not a divider.
More warmongering kike neocon shit.What a surprise.
The kike owned weapon industry must make their money
The delusion.
40.000 Marines are, objectively, nothing. US troops stationed in Japan would have to get the authorization to do so, which is difficult to say the least.
Even if they did, they would be decimated before they even set foot on land.
If the US was going to invade best Korea they would need a lot more than 40k marines.
This is almost shill level ignorance.
>implying we'd bum rush in the most idiotic manner.
>implying we wouldn't use drones and missiles to attack infrastructure like we've been doing for the last 40 years.
>implying the world wouldn't look critically on China and N Korea for being so irresponsible with nuclear arms.
>"pre-emptive strike on the table *wink wink*"
>publishing military plans before military action
Hmm, thinking real hard about this.... BEEP BEEP
THINK COMPLETE
*sabre rattling continues*
THINK RESUMES
Going to go way out on a limb here, just like when Putlet disappeared and everyone thought it was the end of the world, it most certainly is not happening. You will know when it's happening when you wake up in the morning, turn on the TV and see that war were declared
>koreaherald.com
>The draft in this day and age, even under Trump
Probably not going to happen m8.
Looking 'critically' on anyone in the international community doesn't do shit.
john mccain is beating off to that article
oooh yeah war, ooh yeah hihihihi war
If they have air defences that are at least Buk 9k37 level, your "stealth" aircraft would be in trouble, not to mention the entire northern peninsula is one big fucking fortress, with thousands of km's of tunnels.
This will make Vietnam look like a fucking tea party.
>Drones
If they have even the most rudimentary air defence systems your meme drones are fucked.
>CBS President David Rhodes has just left NK
Sauce: KCNA [(((MSM))) is yet to report that]
>China joins WTO
>WTO is run completely on feels
>ex. Trump's feel good bubble in US trade.
>Thinks people won't dump China assets because of their war baiting
There are dozens of angles to prove you wrong from.
As far as I know, there is no evidence that NK has the ability to deliver nuclear payload with missiles. They have nukes, but they are just too big.They have a huge amount of artillery aimed at Seoul though. The city will be destroyed.
Only China really cares about NK and that's only because there are Americans in South Korea. Certainly no one is going to help NK.
Their army is very outdated but it is also huge by today's standards, so the question is how willing would they be to fight. I don't think anyone knows the answer. The elites are loyal to the Kim dynasty and likely will remain loyal if a war happens.
And iraq had the largest during the 1st gulf war and got shit caned, whats your point?
What they do lack, however, is the fuel for those Nukes. My estimate is that they have enough for about 10 weapons, which are 1950's tier, crude, atomic devices.
Out of that 10 they realistically have 5 potential weapons so you do the math.
They have a shitload of stuff aimed at Seoul but the vast majority of that stuff is 1950's era fixed artillery pieces.
The gooks will starve in their fortress, they already have trouble feeding their own people
>Implying the Chinks won't feed them simply to fuck with you.
This isn't Rome total war burger, starvation is not a viable strategy.
>Drones fly at 65,000'
>Cost of one drone $6m
>N Korea still trying to figure out how to drone
>N Korea using old Chinese equipement
>Implying N Korean detecting and shooting down cheap US drones
I think it's a pretty effective strategy
not mainland korea, mainland china. the point of the 40k is to hold off long enough for hawaii and the west coast to get there
korea as its own military....
Don't do it, its a trap
thanks NZ bro, i got ur back if the gooks invade
>I'm 14 and I played CoD.
God I fucking hate the Drone memery.
There is a reason why It's more viable to invest in pilots than in Drones.
Lol. 40k marines could completely fuck things up for China and best korea. Shill
South Korean military is no joke now. Plus they are freaking brainwashed and most conscripts want war with the north.
China would just annex it or the South would take it over. North Korea would have no chance.
You can't be serious. You simply can't.
They're dug in like ticks. It wouldn't exactly be easy I don't think but you're right ol Kimmy would fall
Looks like little Kimmy's been hiding some oil.
If there were to be a war it would literally last a week.
I am serious nigger less marines than that fucked up an entire region in middle east the last 20 years or so. Who the fuck are you kidding? American marines are best infantry.
Yeah but they would starve in a month if china doesn't support them. China also doesn't want all those refugees.
just ignore him. the greatest value of a marine is that they are brainwashed retards
>The People's Liberation Army: 2,300,000 active personnel (2017)
40k marines couldn't even make landfall before they died
>Americans invade N.K.
>Gets pincered by China / Iran
>Russia/Turkey invade europe
Hey there, bud. You just blow in from stupid town?
you mean the army. the marines just sit on corners
Are we assuming they're going to row ashore in wooden boats or do they actually get their equipment and support like normal? We have something like 30k aircraft ready to support them. You faggots are faggots
In case you're too stupid to see: (((deep-state))) wants a war with N. Korea and wants it to be a complete disaster for the US on purpuse, a literal ever lasting humilliation... that wil be blamed on Trump. He'll be ousted, NWO will start.
Digits confirm.
Look at a map again and explain to me how the fuck Iran is going to "pincer" the U.S. forces in Korea?
>What is Vietnam
>What is the first Korean war
Let me put it into perspective for you
Vietnamese Army during the war - 375.000
N. Korean Army as we speak - 2.300.000
Not bronze age camel cavalry you faggot, zerg swarmers with 70 years of brainwashing into thinking that the United States is literally the devil.
We've "liberated" much less oppressed nations.
Why have we let best Korea get away with it for so long?
That's actually where you'd wrong.
One of the most effective military strategies during Bush and Obama's war campaigns was the use of drones and double tap maneuvers.
There's a few clips out of Afghani and Iraqi people saying they started hating sunny days because drones were likely to strike.
And because drones only cost 6-9 million, can be flown from around the world, don't expend any of our soldiers, and can have devastating payloads, they're considered highly efficient.
Compare the cost of a reaper drone (jet drones with high payload) at $9m to a F-35 $102m. The factor in the cost of training the pilot +$9m over 6 years. I think it's obvious which is more effective.
You have forces all over the world
supported by the largest navy in the world
Congrats on being the biggest retard in this thread, you even beat the marinefag
>implying we'd Gen.Mattis hasn't learned anything from previous wars.
>implying there's any profit in war for the US with N Korea
>implying we won't use drones to a massive extent
>implying China wants all the refugees
>Implying 40k marines is enough to even make landfall
We never lost an engagement in Vietnam you communist fuck
But you lost the war you fat fuckhead.
Oh, drumpf needs a war to get his approval ratings over 40%
>implying I ever even mentioned US ground forces.
>implying we wouldn't only use support forces and position forces in the EU incase Russia gets a wild hair
>implying Japan and Australia don't have a dog in this fight
>implying China wants to fight a war this close to it's homeland
>implying this wouldn't be a lose-lose for China and Russia by extension
You see how easy this is for me, right?
Maybe China and US agree to nuke NK together, ensuring high casualties, no refugees just craters.
Name one war usa has won after ww2
>Implying that the Chinese will ever allow strategic bases to be installed on it's borders.
Yes, I can see that.
We actually did not.
we left after creating a devastating kill death ratio for the Vietnamese.
>We
Are you 11?
All of them.
Tell me how they lost any of them after looking at the destruction and devastation of the population and resources left behind?
Just because they didn't leave a field of roses behind doesn't mean they didn't achieve their objectives.
War isn't about stability, you know that right?
Panama, Gulf war 1, Bosnia...
Nice revisionism, fatso
>B-b-but muh K/D
War is about completing objectives not about K/D, and you failed spectacularly considering the Gooks unified their country.
Coalitions, except panama which was not a war.
It would be over in two weeks. The regime would collapse and Kim would be ousted by internal powers to save themselves from total destruction, if it hadn't already happened. The combined military might of NATO would render North Korea completely powerless and anybody who isn't insane or a memer knows this.
We're already at war with North Korea, nobody ever signed a peace treaty.
NK doesn't have enough oil to sustain war for more than a week
Thank the liberals and non-interventionist pressures at home for that. It's our international responsibility to liberate North Korea, and we have failed in enforcing that because muh ghost of iraq
N. Korea waging war with the US.
Let's be real for a minute.
Even China has denounced the last N. Korea missile test.
So you have The USA, Japan and S. Korea vs N. Korea.
China a nation largely depended on export to the US and EU has no economic interest or whatsoever to start a war knowing that it could escalate and potentially mean they'll lose their most important trading partners.
If a war would breakout, it would be over in 1 day.
Not to mention the pressure Kim would come under by his own generals and military leaders. No power could sustain legitimacy for long when you've lost all your allies and NATO are close to destroying your country. There would be a coup before it even began
Only one soldier doesn't have to go there to fight. A few nukes can kill the cancer of world.
The pro NK people in this thread dont realize that the wars we "lost" SE asian theater were because of a lack of support. If we ever go to war with a nuclear power you better believe everyone here would lend our support to the US. This wouldnt be about villagers in straw hats and the left and media couldnt spin it in favor of NK at this point due to years of anti-nk propaganda. When the US supports its military we fucking wreck shit and are unmatched.
We actually have won all of them though. Vietnam is technically counted as a loss because we pulled out but as far as casualties go we came out far ahead.
Same goes for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. There's no reason to stay and keep fighting there, we're basically just fighting their civilians at this point and that's a war you can never truly win unless you glass the entire country.
I cant believe you faggots are thinking that North Korea could stand up to the US. The US Air Force would turn North Korea into a parking lot then the army would just move in and mop things up. Only problem is the nuke situation.
>Nice revisionism
>Nothing revised
?
Let's hear the conditions for winning that war, then. In what way did we lose?
plot twist: leaving after burning the country down isn't losing.
But they have old rifles and no shoes
Do shills get paid by the word now?
US only loses wars because they dont target civilians and they "play by the rules." If the US didnt care about civilians they could just have just killed every single person in Iraq and "won" the war.
Thinking logically, if any country launches nukes there is no value in moderation. Tit for tat leads to escalation anyway, so just first strike annihilate and save your population.
> getting to murder norks and rape their women
> a bad thing
Dude.
>Drumpf starts war with NK
>Every ship gets deployed
>Meanwhile, there's no one guarding the southern border!
>We jump
Go ahead gringo go play with your toys
>Let's hear the conditions for winning that war, then. In what way did we lose?
The military objective was to stop the spread of communism in the far east. Communism however, did spread and the country was reunified under communist rule. Shortly thereafter, Cambodia and Laos also fell to communism.
Just because you left before the final whistle, doesn't mean you won. The military objective failed, you lost the war
>Vietnam is technically counted as a loss because we pulled out
There were really two Vietnam Wars. We left at the end of the first one with South Vietnam still standing. It wasn't until two years later that North Vietnam invaded and conquered them. Not our fault our our loss that the South couldn't be bothered to sort its own shit out in two years' time.
Doesn't South Korea have the THAAD system now?
Are you sure you want to play this game with me, achmed?
>www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA510158
Because we can get into the very specifics of what our military objectives are, what the objectives of war in general are, and if we won or lost militarily and politically.
>short cut to the end of the argument
>we weren't there to stop communism, we were there in support of allies in Vietnam.
LETS DO IT ALREADY!
THEY NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF!
>doesn't group himself in with his countrymen
Are you an internationalist/cosmopolitan?
Tillerson was so low energy he cut the meeting short with SK because he was tired?
Kek
>Russia does not exist
No they aren't calm your tits.
there will no conflict you putz's the blowback of a few million n korean refugees and a western backed nation on china's border is not going to happen, pure saber rattling
> saber rattling
Are you 90?
We didn't lose a military war, but we did lose a political war.
The only reason why we were withdrawing because of politicians gave to the pressure of anti-war group.
Look I'm not saying it would be easy but 40k marines is no pushover force. As for Vietnam we lost because all you communist assholes were and still are programed to hate us so how can we win an ideological war with napalm? Can't happen. BUT WE NEVER LOST A FIGHT and that's the premise of this conversation is it not?
Americans really are retarded, aren't they?
lol touche, olffag, too much foreign affairs reading, its a great place to read establishment though,
Too bad we gave all our military budget to israel. Guess they have to take up the mantle.
What happened to not letting your opponent know what you're planning?