- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Things are heating up again in Korea (UPDATE IN OP: US Mobilizes 2nd ID)
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:25 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:25 pm to Darth_Vader
quick hijack, but just to give you a heads up, your sig probably doesn't mean what you think it means. unless you think it means “Thus do we growl that (our) big toes have, at this moment, been thrown up from below!” not being a dick, just wouldn't want anyone running around with the sig equivalent of a kanji tattoo that means "butterface" or something
LINK
and it's listed as "mock latin" on the wiki if you need another cite.
LINK
end hijack
LINK
and it's listed as "mock latin" on the wiki if you need another cite.
LINK
end hijack
1
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:27 pm to GetCocky11
MacArthur was a tactical and strategic genius who used these skills to turn in comparatively low casualty lists compared to other commanders.
So yes, I can imagine him fighting a war in the 21st century, except for the fact that he would be 135 years old.
So yes, I can imagine him fighting a war in the 21st century, except for the fact that he would be 135 years old.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:28 pm to LSUinMA
quote:
except for the fact that he would be 135 years old.
Futurama head in a glass jar.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:37 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Darth_Vader
Just FYI...I enjoy these threads and enjoy these discussions. I don't intend to be a dick when I counter you. I just generally disagree with you on these topics (and most other topics actually). However, I enjoy the discussion.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:38 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
I do agree with you there. North Korea wouldn't make it very far. I think the population of the Seoul metro area equals the entire population of North Korea. Good luck trying to pacify that city...if they even clear the DMZ.
The biggest issue the population of Seoul would present is that of a massive wave of refugees as soon as the north started shelling the city. There are literally thousands of artillery pieces and rocket batteries zeroed in on Seoul right now. The moment war broke out, they'd start hammering Seoul. There are shelters in place there but most of the people would want to bolt southward ASAP. This would create a massive problem for the South for two reasons.
1. They would choke the main roads that the South would need in order to deploy their forces.
2. It would also cut off, or severely hamper, the flow of reinforcements, arms, and supplies to the front. The bulk of the South's supplies lay south of Seoul in order to keep their supply dumps and arms depots out of the range of any initial barrage from the north. However, keeping everything safe and out of range of the North also means that in the event of war, the ROK army would have to have clear pathways to move things from the south of the country to the north of the country. Having the roads blocked with literally millions of refugees will make this task very difficult.
As I posted above though, the saving grace to the South will probably come from the fact that for the north to invade the south, they'd first have to clear the DMZ which even if they killed everyone on the south side of the DMZ, they'd still be faced with having to clear pathways through literally millions of landmines on both sides of the DMZ. And they'll have to do this all while American & South Korean air power hammers them relentlessly. Once they clear the minefields of the DMZ, they'd still be fricked because their forces would be bottle-necked into these pathways cleared through the minefields, not to mention the natural bottle-necks that would develop thanks to the terrain. All these things would mean that the US & South could maximize their air power advantage to the point it's doubtful the North Korean Army would be able to advance more than a few miles into the South and even then they'd be bled white in the process.
Once the refugee situation in the South was sorted out, the North Korean army would most likely already be a shattered, hollow shell of it's former self and North Korea proper would be wide open to invasion.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:39 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
GetCocky11
I do enjoy a good civil debate.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:40 pm to BamaScoop
You're a fricking idiot.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:40 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The biggest issue the population of Seoul would present is that of a massive wave of refugees as soon as the north started shelling the city. There are literally thousands of artillery pieces and rocket batteries zeroed in on Seoul right now.
Granted, but you'd think the North would only be able to shell Seoul for a few minutes before the South would unleash their batteries.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:42 pm to Darth_Vader
Could the US or South Korea handle all the NK jets taking off in short succession? I think for NK to be neutralized like everyone thinks the US or SK would have to strike preemptively. I don't see that happening so that gives NK the nod for max damage with an all out sucker punch.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:44 pm to Celtic Tiger
quote:
quick hijack, but just to give you a heads up, your sig probably doesn't mean what you think it means. unless you think it means “Thus do we growl that (our) big toes have, at this moment, been thrown up from below!” not being a dick, just wouldn't want anyone running around with the sig equivalent of a kanji tattoo that means "butterface" or something
LINK
and it's listed as "mock latin" on the wiki if you need another cite.
LINK
end hijack
Thank you but my sig is not to be taken literally. It has it's meaning & purpose and I'll just leave it at that.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:50 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
Granted, but you'd think the North would only be able to shell Seoul for a few minutes before the South would unleash their batteries.
That's a good point. As soon as they open fire, they're broadcasting the the South & US forces "here we are! Come kill us!". The question would be how fast can those batteries be silenced? The North's got a freaking shite-ton of them. And the South & US forces don't really have enough artillery to be able to give heavy enough counter-battery fire to suppress them. In fact, most likely, when the shells started impacting Seoul, at that same time they'd probably be impacting the South's own artillery emplacements. Thus the role of silencing the North's artillery would more than likely fall on air power.
This is just a guess, but I'd imagine if the north were able to keep up a sustained bombardment for something like 24 hours, the situation from a refugee standpoint would get out of control.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:53 pm to Darth_Vader
cool. I'm the type that likes to be corrected on that stuff, so I try to do it diplomatically when I can. hope the meaning is a good one
Posted on 8/20/15 at 1:59 pm to bayoudude
quote:
Could the US or South Korea handle all the NK jets taking off in short succession? I think for NK to be neutralized like everyone thinks the US or SK would have to strike preemptively. I don't see that happening so that gives NK the nod for max damage with an all out sucker punch.
I doubt the US or south would ever launch a preemptive war against the north. But one area that the South & the US have a VERY distinct and clear advantage is in air power. The north has a lot of jets to be sure. But only a handful are modern fighters like this Mig 29....
Most of their aircraft are from the the 60's like this Mig-21....
...and even the 50's like this Mig-15.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:02 pm to Celtic Tiger
quote:
cool. I'm the type that likes to be corrected on that stuff, so I try to do it diplomatically when I can. hope the meaning is a good one
Indeed it is a good one. I'd go further into it but this place discusses that aspect of my life enough already without having this otherwise good thread hijacked.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:14 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
This is just a guess, but I'd imagine if the north were able to keep up a sustained bombardment for something like 24 hours, the situation from a refugee standpoint would get out of control.
I can't see how that kind of bombardment would be able to be stopped. Seoul would fall, and rather quickly. What about the tunnels?
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:16 pm to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
Seoul would fall, and rather quickly.
You overestimate the strength of North Korea and underestimate the response of South Korea. North Korea wouldn't be able to launch some kind of successful blitz like they did in the Korean War.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:19 pm to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
I can't see how that kind of bombardment would be able to be stopped.
The only hope I think would be the employment of a massive amount of air power like round the clock carpet bombing of the whole countryside just north of the 38th parallel.
quote:
Seoul would fall, and rather quickly.
I'm not sure the North Koreans would be able to reach Seoul very quickly, if they reached it at all. I laid out the reasons a few posts up.
quote:
What about the tunnels?
I think they'd cause a lot of problems for sure. I think you'd see small special forces teams using them to infiltrate behind the lines to do as much damage as possible. But they'd not be able to launch anything big enough to resemble an actual invasion via the tunnels.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:22 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
You overestimate the strength of North Korea and underestimate the response of South Korea. North Korea wouldn't be able to launch some kind of successful blitz like they did in the Korean War.
Seoul is, what, 30 miles from the DMZ? So, let's say that NK quietly massed troops and equipment along the DMZ over a period of time. Tunnels, etc? The response to a well-timed attack wouldn't be enough to stem the tide. It would fall - and yes, be recaptured, but there isn't any way to stop that big of a train in such a short time.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:23 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
You overestimate the strength of North Korea and underestimate the response of South Korea. North Korea wouldn't be able to launch some kind of successful blitz like they did in the Korean War.
I think you're right here. The barrier that is the DMZ cannot be stressed enough. Like I said earlier, even if the North were able to kill every ROK soldier within 10 miles of the DMZ, they'd still have massive obstacles to overcome. and even doing that all they'll achieve is to concentrate their mechanized forces into nice, tightly packed, miles long columns which will make our A-10 pilots jizz themselves in excitement.
Posted on 8/20/15 at 2:23 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The only hope I think would be the employment of a massive amount of air power like round the clock carpet bombing of the whole countryside just north of the 38th parallel.
Does NK have any S-300s?
This post was edited on 8/20/15 at 2:25 pm
Page 4 of 27
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News