Re: North Korea launches long-range rocket
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:49 pm
Which isnt a good idea. Real bad PR.
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://ns2.ditl.org/forum/
Our air cover would mean that those sites wouldn't be firing for long. Plus, if we're in range of them then they're in range of us.Rochey wrote:The problem isn't them firing missiles. The problem is the shitload of artillary they have hidden in the mountains, the locations of which are mostly unknown to the US. Any Nork attack would be pre-empted by them rolling the big guns out of their caves and levelling everything within range, including Seoul. There's simply no way for the US to prevent this from happening, short of nuking the entire region before the war even starts.If we see them prep for a missile strike. Alpha and knock out their launch sites, or atleast the bulk of them. Some would survive of course though most would be ash. After that a few armored divisions supported by ROK-AF and our own air units out of Japan and South Korea would be a solid block. The PRC wouldn't risk a spill over or risk NCB warheads to be launched due to the risk of a miss fire. North Korea is just to blocked in right now.
PR isn't the problem with nukes. The problem is that now everyone who has them has to worry that you'll use them. So now they will get the idea that maybe they should too.stitch626 wrote:Which isnt a good idea. Real bad PR.
How long would it take your air cover to wipe out thousands of hidden artillary cannons? I dare say it would take them long enough for Seoul to be reduced to a smoking ruin.Our air cover would mean that those sites wouldn't be firing for long.
Yeah, but they know where we are, and we don't (initialy) know where they are.Plus, if we're in range of them then they're in range of us.
Oh, of course. NK would be utterly wiped out if it started a war. Thing is, millions of SK's would also be dead, the country would be in ruins (the northern parts would at least) and the region's economy would plumet. And let's not get into the chaos that would ensue if they decided to unite the two countries into one after the war.
Like I said, there will be losses but they are nothing next to what the North Koreans would suffer.
Thousands? I truly doubt the NKs really have thousands of cannon waiting in the hills that are able to reach Seoul. Even if they did, that would take the bulk of their heavy guns. Putting them tightly together which means its easier for us to take them out.How long would it take your air cover to wipe out thousands of hidden artillary cannons? I dare say it would take them long enough for Seoul to be reduced to a smoking ruin.
Just leads to the cost of war.Yeah, but they know where we are, and we don't (initialy) know where they are.
Again, you're over shooting on this. Millions of SKs dead? Hardly. That region's economy would survive just fine since most of the trade ports are on the southern half of the country. Trade being the primary resource of money in SK. As to the idea to unite Korea. A large number of NKs already want that. So many so that now most of the NK military is placed to keep NK under control. There own border guard face north now because so many NKs are trying to leave.Oh, of course. NK would be utterly wiped out if it started a war. Thing is, millions of SK's would also be dead, the country would be in ruins (the northern parts would at least) and the region's economy would plumet. And let's not get into the chaos that would ensue if they decided to unite the two countries into one after the war.
*shrug* It's what I've heard. IIRC, the figure was given by either Seafort or Kendall here. I'll try and find the thread where it was mentioned.
Thousands? I truly doubt the NKs really have thousands of cannon waiting in the hills that are able to reach Seoul.
Yes, it makes them easier to take out. It also allows them to inflict millions of civillian casualties in the opening stage of a war.Even if they did, that would take the bulk of their heavy guns. Putting them tightly together which means its easier for us to take them out.
And the question is whether millions of SK civilian casualties is worth it.Just leads to the cost of war.
Seoul alone has over ten million inhabitants. There are also plenty of other heavily populated cities in the northern regions of SK. I don't think civilian casualties upwards of a million would be too far out, considering that every NK cannon and rocket would be firing at the cities.Again, you're over shooting on this. Millions of SKs dead? Hardly.
Do you realise just how seriously the loss of Seoul and the other northern cities would cripple the country? Imagine all the cities along the east coast of the US suddenly being wiped off the map. That's going to seriously fuck things up big time.That region's economy would survive just fine since most of the trade ports are on the southern half of the country. Trade being the primary resource of money in SK.
That they want to doesn't mean it's a good idea. Hell, Germany is still paying huge sums after being reuinited, and North Korea would make East Germany look like the bargain of the century.As to the idea to unite Korea. A large number of NKs already want that. So many so that now most of the NK military is placed to keep NK under control. There own border guard face north now because so many NKs are trying to leave.
Tight leash???Granitehewer wrote:this thread is fun but deepcrush is on a tight leash,its like watching a panther juggle peanuts, we need a separate no holds barred b*tchslap thread/forum!