re: Here is the Weaponry the North Koreans Would Use Against Us in a War

If we were to bomb them with our AF/Navy and kick the party off with the first shots, why wouldnt we simultaneously take out all of these known launching stations from the onset. Then commence to making a parking lot out of the rest and defeat them from the inside out.

Well, the difference is that if an ICBM gets through, the consequences are far larger than if a SCUD got through.

quote:

---

In all seriousness am I wrong for not being the slightest bit worried about a potential North Korean missile attack.

---

I have basically 0% fear of them causing harm to American soil. What I fear is what they could very easily do to Seoul. They could kill a million or so civilians in the blink of an eye.

quote:

---

quote:
Take an AK and an AR and put a target at 100yds.



If given the choice, which would you rather be shot in the chest with at 20 yards?

---

If this is the argument, I choose to take the first shot. You can choose the weapon I use. You will lose.

quote:

---

The underground network is pretty well mapped, control of space and fine-tuning sensors enables lots of shite for analyst to look over. Seismic tells us more.

The thing is it doesn't matter how antiquated their gear is. They have a large population hostage. Zeroed in. Seoul and it's lives and the Garrison on DMZ are rubble because it's going to be a wave of metal and death cult. And it doesn't matter that the guns are rusting, enough of them will fire to make it the worst days of modern warfare history.

Tunnels? We fricked the Vietcong and the Japs out of them on the reg. It's the willpower to do it right that is the difference between Japan and Vietnam.

It's going to be a bloody affair that will resemble a mix of the WW3 scenarios and the guerilla campaigns we've prepared for and have had.

And we'll just all have to pray the nuclear beast stays out of it.

---

Please write more. I could read this kinda writing all day.

I suck at the English.

quote:

---

Well, the difference is that if an ICBM gets through, the consequences are far larger than if a SCUD got through.

---

Japan has a missile defense system and has been testing it diligently since June. I heard just this morning 8/10/2017 that Japan has assured the US that no missiles will hit Guam. I like the sound of that. But is that false confidence?
Japan Missile Defense system

Because we won't hit all of them. Or even a majority. And it just kicks things off and divides the security council except this time it'll be USA on one side and Britain France China and Russia on the other side going "dude wtf!?" a s a population burns.

Their rocketry is awful, they most likely haven't miniaturized the nuke yet. And it's going to take lighting up the ridges across the DMZ for a week to get all their batteries if we even have a presence to operate there.

The garrison will die. South Koreans will die in droves, norks will die in droves but think they're winning for 72ish hours.

It's a fricked up situation. If we go first, China has to enter the other side. If norks go first, china will say not my pig not my farm.

So we can't preemptive with missiles. Even when it starts we can't send in planes north of the DMZ until we got a ground presence. We aren't going to preemptive with our ground presence while we have a perfect willing to maul itself army on the North side willing to use their bodies to clear the minefields.

So we stand and wait to take it on the chin and then swing back harder. Because that's the way it has to be.

Good stuff. Could read this stuff all day. Thanks for the explanation

quote:

---

We could debate this all day and not change either's mind about the subject. I concede the AR is more accurate and really cool how it parts out. I just personally like AK's better than AR's and that was the only basis of my original comment.

---

They both have their strengths and weaknesses and are pretty evenly matched. If they weren't we would've seen militaries phase out one or the other.

quote:

---

don't think ICBM defense systems are like the Patriot systems. Also, I seem to recall a programming glitch in the Patriot that caused some serious issues.

I guess I'm saying that no defense system is perfect and hitting an ICBM is really difficult.

---

you're probably right but you've got to think there is some kind of technology to knock down an ICBM or at least incapacitate one.

Ultimately this is all Harry Truman's fault, if he would have just let Douglas MacArthur do his thing we wouldn't be in this situation. Of course we had the possibility of going to war with China on deck, so who knows what would have been the better outcome of that conflict on the Korean Peninsula that technically has never ended.