USA WILL LOSE TO NK IN A MODERN WAR

>be strongest military complex on earth
>lose to starving, pot smoking military using 50's war tech
news.com.au/world/general-warns-us-could-lose-against-north-korea/news-story/b07dfe17f283a480bd0adbaf6493e5c3

...

Well we should just surrende.r We are clearly out match

they said the same about Saddam

Great strategist, this ex army general.

>Saddam had tested ICBM's and H-bombs

If it gets hot Kimmy will super EMP the US back into the stone age while enjoying exile in China.

The US can beat literally anyone on the planet. They just have dumb fucking generals like this guy and pussy ass fucking bullshit tactics that aren't meant to do anything but prolong war for monetary gain.

...

>Kim nukes an american aircraft career
>american economy collapses
>flawless victory

This is literally what it takes. The economy is THIS shit.

>population of 25.7 million
>army is simply too big to beat

It's because we don't do war like we used too. It used to be you'd come in kill all the aristocrats put locals in power. Then most importantly you send in your men to stay and mongeralize their children so they lose their identity.

Is there anybody with a brain that believes this?

NK itself is obviously not much of a challenge but if china's involved there could be problems. China is midway through a programme to challenge the us for sea superiority in the pacific, with conventional buildups and base construction alongside programmes to develop weapons to nullify the US carrier advantage. With every day China comes closer to giving the US a run for its money in the event of a general non nuclear war.

>iraqi army: 400k
>north korea: 1 million with 6 million reservists

>nork too big to beat
>10,000 UAV, each one beating thousand norks
>10,000,000 norks beaten

>pic related
get fuckin rekt.

Can't wait for North Korea builds the EMP that can kill all Americans.

>[North Korean] General Warns: 'US could lose against North Korea'

Fixed the title....

America would lose in the sense that millions of people (including South Koreans) would die and it would also destabilize the region, massively disrupt global markets, and end up biting the American government in the ass, even if North Korea is eventually defeated. That's not even including the ramifications of China getting involved (which it said it would if America took the first shot).

A better option would be to play it cool, make North Korea feel it's not threatened, maybe give a "concession" not to hold joint military exercises near North Korea so they let their guard down, and make a backroom deal with President Xi to undermine the North Korean government so China can put in a less bellicose puppet in power there. Maybe in exchange, Trump would back off in the South China Sea or act as an intermediary in multilateral negotiations. Or perhaps use some economic bargaining chip to bring Xi to the table. But this would take some serious political acumen that Trump sorely lacks.

Kim, first and foremost, wants to preserve his regime. History has shown that North Korea has legitimate concerns, considering the US has tried to block diplomatic deals in the past, and how it deals with other countries like Iraq and Libya. North Korea will not take the initiative and attack the US. Everything is a bluff.

G L O R I O U S

Where are our greatest allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, when NK directly threatens nuclear strikes on the US? What if we maintained hegemony somewhere more relevant?

The difference is that our military aren't malnourished 3rd world gooks

>Where are our greatest allies, Israel and Saudi Arabia, when NK directly threatens nuclear strikes on the US?

The reason we hate North Korea is because of Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Abdul don't you know modern military equipment is EMP immune

What the fuck are these retarded looking guys and why people use them on memes?

Besides the shit not being feasible of them actually being able to nuke one without us letting them, and the loss of life involved this would be the best possible thing to happen.

We could actually go to war with no restraints and the world couldn't say shit.

>this dumb nigger will get a US government pension for the rest of his life
The welfare state was a mistake.

So act like a woman? Fuck that, MAGA.

Why doesn't America just annihilate North Korea? Do they fear the Juchean warrior?

>implyng they didn't already lose to rice niggers
*inhales*

Aus is literally your greatest ally, our PM quickly came out publicly supporting US military and we have sent our navy there to do a bunch of drills w your 3 carriers.

Why would the US economy collapse if 5% of the US carrier fleet was suddenly irradiated?

Do you think commerce is exclusively conducted on aircraft carriers?

It's not like the haven't already lost to an starving, pot smoking military using 50's war tech. They even already lost to Somalis using sticks and stones.

That does not matter
Either you can fight or not, and what we have seen from your country rather confirms the second option

Infantry numbers /= military strength. China/nk has a shitton of infantry but not even close to the amount of aircraft and other random shit that the US has, get it now?

Er... no. Its rated to a certain level and type of em protection. Its always possible to build a bigger boom

No, acting like a woman would be doing what Trump and Kim are doing now. Stamping their feet, making idle threats, and not listening to reason.

The US military is the world's most expensive joke.

>not knowing who q is,

literally leave and never come back

>anti war protestors get 30 billion Soros bucks
Cant wait

Sure the US would lose if we did an 18th century fight with two opposing sides forming a line and firing. But the US would just rain down ordinance from above or from the sea.

You mean the same country that completely conquered two sovereign countries in a matter of weeks over the past couple decades?

my guess is, he means with the 20,000 soldiers stationed their.
In which case, yeah its pretty obvious that 20k dudes isn't going to beat an entire country's army.

Mostly this is fake news to get easy revenue with its shock headline. Seems to be working, Sup Forums of all places is giving them revenue.

We will never relinquish control of the seas. Not willingly anyway.
The US is unconquerable because we are separated from the rest of you faggots by 2 massive oceans which we maintain absolute control of. Surrendering that control provides a small opening which a future enemy might exploit.

Hur dur, we are a third world country with a huge army needed to police our shitskin population into compliant poverty.

We have no force projection and if we were seriously attacked by the US our supply chain wouldn't collapse and 80% of our million soldiers wouldn't desert.

I bet you think Australia could be invaded by Indonesia because they have 1mil.

You tinfoil niggers need to find a corner and die.

they're very powerful goy, we need to increase (((defense))) spending to deal with this looming threat

US sucks at guerrilla warfare. That's where they'd lose. Sure they can bomb the shit out of NK but that won't be enough. They'll have to put boots on the ground and when that happens they'll get bumrushed from the south and then they're fucked.

Trump is president now, not Obongo.

Trump won't hold back. It would already be a huge debacle if even 1000 US soldiers died while annihilating NK even without nukes.

in a conventional war what do you think the norks will do, sit back and defend?
They will take the South in days. Short of us deploying 100's of 1000's of boots and equipment on the ground we would not stop them.

DPRK wouldn't be as easy as Iraq, anybody who can read a map and knows the basics about the terrain of North Korea could tell you that. DPRK has over 5000 tanks in inventory.

Kek
>Somalis beating anyone
Like that ever happened

We might be the US's most eager and compliant ally but militarily we're hardly the "greatest"

nuke em

>US sucks at guerrilla warfare
And North Korea sucks at bot starving. Good luck fighting a guerilla war with no supplies.

I guess what really matters is if these other countries have the missile capability to shoot down US aircraft or sink US carriers. If they do, it probably doesn't matter how many planes and vessels the US has. If they can't, then the US is in good shape apart from most of the population being entirely uninterested in being world policeman anymore. Which could bring its own ramifications, or not.

SOON

>thinking human waves is effective

NK would have to have China backing them up with airpower in order to win any sort of war against the south. They could win a war of attrition, but not a conventional war.

People who think that any war since WW2/Korean War were anything more than smokescreens to provide money laundering and socioengineering projects are fucking stupid.

LOL. One carrier group could level the entirety of North Korea...and there are 3 sitting off the coast.

Its ok man, kids these days aare all about the lens flare

The fact that you believe that is pretty sad. If NK could fuck up the US imagine what they'd do to AUS. They'd likely team up with the Emus too.

You dont understand what he said. According to American doctrine, o ly a nuke can sink a carrier. Carriers are considered land masses for the US. Thus, sinking a carrier is akin to nuking the US meaning every carrier and nuclear submarine will, without ordes from the president, attack and nuke NK.

No sir. What example would you say is the best?

>or sink US carriers
The US has literally nuked carriers from the 40s before and they don't sink.

Good luck sinking a modern honeycombed carrier made out of carbon fiber and plastic. You might get a mission kill but it's damn near impossible to sink a modern carrier even if it lets you try.

What if north Korea actually challenges the world..... and wins?

Same you said about Vietnam

There is the issue of Trump not really being elected with the idea that US foreign policy needed to be more aggressive. People here don't want any more war. Whether that would translate into domestic rebellion, who can say. It isn't as simple as "Trump is in charge now, goyim", though.

US could nonstop bomb the norks with air superiority as well as much higher range artillery. the southies would just have to hold the line and prevent seoul from getting zergd

why do people claim that NK is any threat at all? at least explain yourselves. naah, WW2 tier tanks and artillery line are NOT an argument

WUT? We spent all this money to lose to Norks?

Well fuck, I either want some money back or your full of shit.....

Hmmm.....sage

>We will never relinquish control of the seas. Not willingly anyway.
Then you better deal with China before they take that decision away from you. Personally I think the world needs a shakeup so meh.

>The US is unconquerable because we are separated from the rest of you faggots by 2 massive oceans which we maintain absolute control of. Surrendering that control provides a small opening which a future enemy might exploit.

Indeed, yet you guys seem on the verge of doing just that. Also over the arctic through canada was always considered a risk during the cold war, just to add.

This too, shall pass.

>DPRK has over 5000 tanks in inventory.
T-34s are not tanks, they're museum pieces.

Also
>firing a T-34 or T-54 in mountainous terrain
El oh el. Enjoy dying.

>greatest allies
>israel and fucking saudi arabia
in what fucking mentally degraded state do you need to be to think that those worthless piece-of-shit countries are your greatest allies. fucking hell. what gives you this idea
>haha whats a 'western world'
that's literally like us calling mongolia our greatest ally

inb4 butthurt ausfag

good luck fielding an army through northern canada

Any former commander who thinks we're not prepped for war is so far out of clearance it's not even funny. America has the biggest fucking set of blueballs for a legal war out of any country on the planet. We have literally dedicated the past 60 years since the last actual war to develop shit that makes it as efficient and brutal as possible.

I find it hard to believe that carriers can withstand direct nuclear attacks. I'll take your word for it, though, largely because I'm uninterested in arguing with an overt jingoist cryptically advocating for yet another pointless war to get White men killed.

delusional call of duty playing American millenial soldiers who grew up in an age of low intensity conflicts would be in for a rude awakening when they are mercilessly crushed by the Korean People's army

I am saying exactly what you are saying. So the real question is why haven't we false flag nuked an aircraft carrier ? I mean shit we probably practically let the Japs destroy our aging Navy, while saving the newer ships so we could enter WW2 with justification and the ability to greenlight unlimited spending for a new fleet

>use h bomb
>get glassed and be dead

lol ok sink the US carriers

can you sink Japan?

nope. so the US will just operate out of Japan and keep carpet bombing you

The biggest threat to America in a war with NK are SJW. Hippies made America lose Vietnam, SJW will make America lose NK. Kim doesn't have to overpower or beat the Americans in any form, he just has to resist long enough for the war to become politically unviable.

>trump says all military options are on the table
>not considering nukes to be on that list

fucking abbo retards

The US, just by the sheer power gap between the US and the next top 20 counties combined and that has a lot to do with the well engineered equipment our forefathers have left for us. But the problem is all the resources in the world don't mean much if you cannot utilize them properly.
We are in clear decline, coasting off of prosperity of our forefathers, our population is beginning to fight with itself. And we can hardly impress American values into the next generation.
Rome had a superior military too, didn't stop it from collapsing. The incorporation of diversity racially and all the gender shit has severely weakened the US military, plain and simple.

We need more additional pylons

>implying NK can maintain supply lines for 7 million soldiers

We could do that to him too

he said even with the 20k combined with all of SK troops is not enough

>carpet bombing you
>you
The US is going to carpet bomb New Jersey from Japan? Or do you just assume that anyone unenthusiastic for another jewish war is a NoKo pinko posting on a proxy?

>I find it hard to believe that carriers can withstand direct nuclear attacks.
Probably because you're an uneducated putz. Yes, if you're on a nuked carrier you will die but no, that carrier will not sink.

The US did it multiple times in the 60s with early 1940s iron carriers and the shit didn't sink. And if you can't sink one with a nuke how easy do you think it is to sink one with conventional munitions? Do you have any idea how much air is trapped in a ship the size of a US super carrier?

An unfocused random nearby bomb doesn't sink an old carrier designed for withstanding a helluva more direct attack than a modern one. Wow.
Never mind that every person on board would be dead or dying, that there might be issues with the reactor, that the entire thing would be uninhabitable from acquired radioactivity for quite a while, and never mind the destruction wrought on the fitout and equipment by fire and shock.

It might survive in the sense of something still floats, but it's a writeoff.

Combine that with the dedicated carrier killers being developed by everyone atm or the sheer kinetic energy delivered by suborbital ballistic systems and carriers wouldn't last too long in a widespread general war these days.

>US will lose to NK
>unless you GIBE MONI

lol
as we have since since the invention or aerial combat, bombing alone (unless nukes) will never defeat your enemy. It never has!
Norks game plan in the event that hostilities recommence will be to zerg the south. They would already have thousands of sleeper agents in the south that will sabotage everything and anything. Once they zerg into the south any attempt to repel them will involve so much civilian causalities. It is a no win unless SK has enough troops and equipment along the DMZ to repel them. I would think an army in the hundreds of thousands with supporting armor would be a good start. How many active troops are defending south korea atm?

If everyone on board is dead and the hull is an irradiated dump, what's the difference whether it tips under or not?

Generals always say this sort of thing, it's because they want more money. It's called threat inflation.

What you might not realize:

>NK is backed by Russia, China and Iran.
>Their military isn't actually starving, neither does its population, at least for the last 15 years, according to population growth.
>Logistics are the main deciding factor regulating how much an army can deploy and it can (or cannot) do at an operational level
>NK will lash out against the US supply lines first, virtually pushing the agressor beyond any hope of invasion
>Logistic failure is the primary reason why the US never accomplished its objectives in war (except against grenada island) and resorts to proxies.

All of you thinking the US is powerful beyond the shadow of a doubt need to read more about military principles.

Again, you might get a mission kill but you sure as shit aren't sinking a modern super carrier. The thinks are built with a honeycomb structure and have an entire city's worth of air trapped inside. They are literally excessively buoyant.

>coasting off the prosperity of our forefathers

america's emergence as the world's superpower happened over 100 years after the founding fathers died

You know the US has been plastic metal that is design to be EMP immune for modern military equipment since the 90s. Let alone the lead lined armored vehicles. The private sector might be fucked but the US military can still glass North Korea, have a communication network across the country/trans-Atlantic, and have more nukes than every country except Russia.

You call the US the aggressor and tell us to read more about military principles.

You're not ignorant but you're not that smart either. How's the NK going to strike supply lines that are an ocean away?