POLL: How will our ground troops do against N. Korea?

[iGas]

Originally posted by: Away

Originally posted by: iGas

American will have their ass handed to them if they go into N. Korea, because that is China back yard.

You're an idiot.

Here you go flag waving ____

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Casawi
You can't really compare a US soldier to an Iraqi. it's like comparing an African country to Canada... I don't know if that makes sense.

Especially since Canada is barely a country.

 

[glenn1]

Originally posted by: amdhunter
I wonder how well our troops would do against an enemy that can manage to fight back for once, and not just be easy shots like the Iraqi people are.

I doubt the North Koreans will be throwing bottle rockets, or using cheap land mines to take out their targets. North Korea will be bringing out the big guns, and their elite fighting ninja skills onto the playing field, and give our troops a real good run for the money.

In the end, I believe our troops will pull it off, but only because of air support, and high end missle technologies. There's no way for them to win without it.

What does ATOT think?

The U.S. could win without firing a shot - we'd just bomb them with food, and the war would be over. Last time I visited the DMZ, the Nork on the other side looked like he would kill his own family for my Chicken a-la King MRE (and everyone who's old enough to have eaten one can tell you how nasty those are). And these were the border troops (the best fed folks in the army), and before the famines really kicked in in the last decade or so.

 

[MovingTarget]

The ground troops will get pwned in the initial assault if NK goes all out as they have a HUGE low-tech advantage. However, if this battle does take place then NK will cease to exist very soon once we get the ball rolling on the counterattack. However, the war of attrition that their remaining military would wage will be quite painful for a few months/years afterwards.

 

[Woosta]

The ignorance in this thread is strong.

 

[BoomerD]

If American troops cross the 38th parallel...Red Chinese troops will once again come to the aid of the North Koreans...in spite of our financial ties.

IF that happens, things will get fugly very quickly...and I believe the draft will once again be reinstated.

 

[Leros]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
If American troops cross the 38th parallel...Red Chinese troops will once again come to the aid of the North Koreans...in spite of our financial ties.

IF that happens, things will get fugly very quickly...and I believe the draft will once again be reinstated.

*looks at birthdate* crap

 

[jpeyton]

Did they discover oil in NK or something?

 

[Chaotic42]

Could this be a perfect way to erase our debt to China?:

1) North Korea invades South Korea
2) United States attacks North Korea
3) China attacks South Korea/America/UN troops
4) United States declares that it will not repay debts to China due to their attacking of American troops.

 

[woodie1]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
If American troops cross the 38th parallel...Red Chinese troops will once again come to the aid of the North Koreans...in spite of our financial ties.

IF that happens, things will get fugly very quickly...and I believe the draft will once again be reinstated.

There's no doubt that China is the 800 LB. gorilla. I'm not sure how much support they would provide this time considering how erratic the NK regime has become. They can't be comfortable with the idea of the North having nukes.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Could this be a perfect way to erase our debt to China?:

1) North Korea invades South Korea
2) United States attacks North Korea
3) China attacks South Korea/America/UN troops
4) United States declares that it will not repay debts to China due to their attacking of American troops.

WalMart goes bankrupt. Dell goes bankrupt. Apple goes bankrupt. Anyone with a "Made In China" sticker on their bread and butter products goes bankrupt.

Yes, China needs Americans to keep their factories running. But we need China just as much. War with China is not happening in this lifetime.

Remember that China doesn't hold our debt; they hold our currency. If things go south with them, they can readily find buyers for their hundreds of billions in US bonds. But their quality of life is already pretty low, so war with them will affect their living standards a lot less than it will affect us.

But besides the complete destruction of American commerce, your solution is perfect. :roll:

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Woosta
The ignorance in this thread is strong.

:thumbsup:

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: jpeyton


Yes, China needs Americans to keep their factories running. But we need China just as much.

We don't need them nearly as much as they need us. Anyone that has tried to sell a car or house knows that sellers are a dime a dozen and rich buyers are virtually non-existent. Within a year or two a lot of southern Asia and parts of Africa could ramp up to provide cheap production of basic items, but as a customer we're not replaceable. Their economy crashes without us, ours only briefly stumbles without them.

 

[mwmorph]

Why do people think China will fight America? The chance of that happening in 2009 and beyond are so slim, I'd rather put my money on Argentina beginning a war with Great Britain or Swine Flu actually being a credible threat.

Neither side will ever do that. The chance is as close to zero as is possible. The only Countries less likely to attack America are those in NATO.

There is no more Red Commie scare and even when there was, for a decades, the Communist government of China saw the USSR as a much bigger threat than any capitalist country for various reasons.

China and the Soviets were not allies for 90% of the cold war. Today, China and the US are about on as friendly terms as you can get without having been a former colony with shared cultures or some pre-established history.

As for a invasion of N. Korea, Seoul would take a lot of damage. N. and S. Korean civilian deaths would mass into the hundreds of thousands if not millions (There's something like 7k artillery pieces pointed at Seoul because of the proximity to the border of N. Korea), but US troops would easily bomb/cruise missile/advanced warfare N. Korea into submission fairly quickly. It would be like when Russia invaded Georgia, utterly 1 sided.

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: amdhunter
I wonder how well our troops would do against an enemy that can manage to fight back for once, and not just be easy shots like the Iraqi people are.

I doubt the North Koreans will be throwing bottle rockets, or using cheap land mines to take out their targets. North Korea will be bringing out the big guns, and their elite fighting ninja skills onto the playing field, and give our troops a real good run for the money.

In the end, I believe our troops will pull it off, but only because of air support, and high end missle technologies. There's no way for them to win without it.

What does ATOT think?

I think you're an asshole that has no respect for the military. With any luck, your house will take the first nuke.

Now go cry to the mods about me being mean to you.

I said they would win... :lips:

 

[Gooberlx2]

Nice, how there's no middle ground in the poll. Destroy or be destroyed. How about the option for a long, hard effort with many casualties. Ultimately we'd still prevail. (though Seoul, S.K. would be fucked)

Another thing to consider is that we have one of the most battle-experienced militaries, due to current efforts in other obvious conflicts. When's the last time N.K troops actually fought an opposing force?

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: ja1484

Ground troops? We still use those?

No war can be fought without ground troops. Unless, of course, you're going for destruction, and that's it.

War is typically a territory game. Cannot hold territory without ground troops. They are the ones who go in once an area has been shelled to rubble to clear it out of remaining enemy, and hold that ground and establish new positions. This then becomes a stronghold, which is used for resupply and troops maneuver from there toward new territory. Every true war is like that, at least wars with States. Wars with non-State actors are tough, and that is where we failed in the beginning of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. We learned, we developed new methods, and things have been turning around since that point. But it'll be tough to completely kill the insurgent effort, because it's not a real entity with a physical location. At least, not until those of Islamic faith can fight back against the weak who are using different interpretations.

And this whole thing with North Korea? We have different styles now that are capable of, in theory, quickly bending to the situation on the ground.

A State-based military, would struggle against the US, if they were alone in the effort. War with state-based military is every much a logistical chess game as it is a story of bloodshed.

The technology we have now would thoroughly provide supremacy on the ground from the air, at least for the most part. It would be up to ground efforts to make use of that in an on-demand fashion.

You just typed way too much for no reason.

Seriously, I thought we just use the air force now to win wars.

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2
Nice, how there's no middle ground in the poll. Destroy or be destroyed. How about the option for a long, hard effort with many casualties. Ultimately we'd still prevail. (though Seoul, S.K. would be fucked)

Everyone would have voted for the middle option. People in this country love long, hard efforts when it comes to meaningless wars it seems.

 

[zinfamous]

This i snot the NK of the 50s. after half a century of living under poverty and batshit insane dictatorships, the malnourished and under-equipped NK military will not be able to stand up alone.

I'm not saying it would be easy (esp when China gets involved), but expect huge defections from the get-go. Very few NK citizens want to remain in NK, let alone fight for it. I'm sure there are some die-hard brainwashed commanders, but the grunts aren't going to be easy to inspire.

 

[ja1484]

Also, +2 internet points for whoever used the term "Nork" earlier in this thread. That made my day.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Within a year or two a lot of southern Asia and parts of Africa could ramp up to provide cheap production of basic items

I'm not worried about us finding new markets to sew our shirts and make our toothbrushes. What happens to the US's leading role in technology when Quanta/Compal/Wistron Chinese factories stop shipments to the US?

Again, I think most people here grossly underestimate how much China's manufacturing base directly/indirectly affects trillions of dollars in American commerce. Nobody wins if we go to war with China. That's why it's not going to happen, period.

Any serious decision to go to war with China would likely be preceded by a round-table conference call with every CEO of every Fortune500 company in the US.

 

[Dacalo]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
If American troops cross the 38th parallel...Red Chinese troops will once again come to the aid of the North Koreans...in spite of our financial ties.

LMAO! That's a good joke.

Seriously, you think China would risk it's economy and it's status in the world for NK? We are not in 1950's anymore. Not only does China have economic ties with the U.S., they also have significant investments from SK. Samsung, LG, and Hyundai to name a few have large presence in China.

I think once war starts, you will see massive defections and rebellions within NK amid the chaos. Starving and desperate North Koreans who are not involved in politics and not as royal would not hesitate to take the chance for better life. There already are underground resistances within NK (seen documentaries on this) but due to the military's iron grip their activities are limited.

SK should able to hold its own with 650,000+ troops with their advanced equipments, tanks, artillery, AEGIS destroyers, and air force. The U.S. troops may just provide supporting role and additional air support. The U.S. is planning to hand over wartime command of Korean troops in 2012 anyways (currently, both U.S. and SK troops are under Combined Forces Command, or CFC) and take more of a supporting role.

Initial damage and casualties will be great on SK's side due to North's artillery. The only advantage NK has over SK is element of surprise. Most of NK artillery are in fixed positions, buried in bunkers. Their immobility would decrease their effectiveness after advantage of surprise is gone.

Japan and China do not want a unified Korea, thus do not want war. On Japan's part, they would see rise of another potent power in their region. SK's biggest weakness is lack of natural resources, and NK has plenty of them. I understand that SK would be impacted economically in order to rebuild NK, but in the long run, Japan doesn't like it. In addition, it would also mean nuclear armed Korea if there are any nukes when reunification occurs.

China does not want a U.S. ally on it's borders, nor does Russia. That means they may have to deal with U.S. military bases located both in Korea and Japan. Not appealing to China.

 

[0roo0roo]

iraq was not an easy shot. atleast gulf 1 wasn't. they had one of the largest land armies around. yes by gulf 2 they were pretty battered, but during gulf 1 they had tanks and all that nice stuff. largest tank battle in decades. sadly was not filmed.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Within a year or two a lot of southern Asia and parts of Africa could ramp up to provide cheap production of basic items

I'm not worried about us finding new markets to sew our shirts and make our toothbrushes. What happens to the US's leading role in technology when Quanta/Compal/Wistron Chinese factories stop shipments to the US?
.

Those are Taiwanese companies and they'd love us to destroy China's economy. They build new factories in Indonesia or Thailand or India or Nigeria and they're back in business. China is just manufacturing, you can put up a factory anywhere there's land and power and that's easy to find all over the world. It would take a little longer to get a steady supply of laptops than it would take to get a new supply of toothbrushes, but it would happen pretty quickly. WE can go 2 years without laptops, China can't go 2 years without selling them.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

they will stop at the first ramen stand, have the first real meal in years and lay down their weapons