Time To HAUL ASS Out Of South Korea

[EatMorChikin]

I'm not as worried about Seoul as I am a nuke from N. Korea being launched at the US.

Of course, which is why I'm advocating pulling US forces off the Korean Peninsula and then informing Kimchi that if he tests another ICBM we will flatten and irradiate everything in a 10 mile radius around him.

You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.

 

[Tom Horn]

I'm not as worried about Seoul as I am a nuke from N. Korea being launched at the US.

Of course, which is why I'm advocating pulling US forces off the Korean Peninsula and then informing Kimchi that if he tests another ICBM we will flatten and irradiate everything in a 10 mile radius around him.

You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.

Nope...we'd lose multiple aircraft to their AA batteries and might well lose a carrier if they got in a lucky shot. One ICBM, no MIRV, single-warhead....BANG out go the lights in the Kim palace. Let the Chinese figure out who their new leader will be....one thing you can count on...the new leader won't be threatening the US.

 

[Markle]

Now, let's talk about the number of North Korean troops that would automatically surrender and ask for political asylum in South Korea, because they are starving to death while serving in the military of an idiot who thinks he is a god. North Korea is using old ass military equipment while South Korea has some of the latest and greatest U.S. built stuff. One on one, South Korea would more than likely beat North Korea without the U.S.

Wow, are you off base!

 

[Markle]

Once Kim is gone and N.Korea is pacified, there's no need for US forces there.

If you believe that, you are far more than a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

 

[Markle]

NK missiles can barely clear the launch pad.

Another lie.

 

[Tom Horn]

Once Kim is gone and N.Korea is pacified, there's no need for US forces there.

If you believe that, you are far more than a few fries short of a Happy Meal.

The 1990's called...they want your dipshit one-liner back.

 

[Lewdog]

Now, let's talk about the number of North Korean troops that would automatically surrender and ask for political asylum in South Korea, because they are starving to death while serving in the military of an idiot who thinks he is a god. North Korea is using old ass military equipment while South Korea has some of the latest and greatest U.S. built stuff. One on one, South Korea would more than likely beat North Korea without the U.S.

Wow, are you off base!

Right, what a great response, did you spend a week to come up with that?

 

[Markle]

UOTE="EatMorChikin, post: 17507240, member: 52928"]You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.[/QUOTE]

Good we have the military in charge instead of any of the jokers here who think we should bail on South Korea or attack their nuclear facilities.

Seoul Korea, population over 10 million is little more than 10 miles or so from North Korea. North Korea would have heavy artillery reigning down on the city, along with their 1.2 million man army plus 500,000 in reserves.

Yes, we would defeat North Korea but, as General Mattis has said, the battle would be horrendous.

 

[Lewdog]

UOTE="EatMorChikin, post: 17507240, member: 52928"]You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.

Good we have the military in charge instead of any of the jokers here who think we should bail on South Korea or attack their nuclear facilities.

Seoul Korea, population over 10 million is little more than 10 miles or so from North Korea. North Korea would have heavy artillery reigning down on the city, along with their 1.2 million man army plus 500,000 in reserves.

Yes, we would defeat North Korea but, as General Mattis has said, the battle would be horrendous.[/QUOTE]

You just don't get it. Fat Boy Kim had to go on national television and ask his citizens to eat less food and give more to the army because they were starving, all while he stuffs his face with expensive imported cheese, imported whiskey, and smokes imported cigarettes. And you think those soldiers are going to run across the DMZ and die for him? Many of them are only following his orders now so they don't get fed to dogs, mowed down by aircraft machine guns, or publicly executed and their families sent to work camps. As soon as they stepped into South Korea and had the opportunity to surrender and become free citizens in South Korea? It would be like the first Gulf War all over again.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What's stopping us from dropping a big firecracker on the fat little bastard in Pingpongyang? We've got 30K troops within the north's artillery range is what. They've been there since 1953 and we ain't getting a dime from the S.Korean government for their care and feeding. They'd be overrun if Kimchi attacked so they're sitting ducks regardless. But they'd get nuked for doing it and China won't allow it. So the stalemate goes on, the north develops a missile that will hit mainland USA, and China gets trade advantages out of keeping their little dog on a chain. That's been the game.

But now there's a different deck being dealt. S. Korea just REFUSED our ability to defend our troops by installing our THAAD missile defense. Yes, Trump asked them for a billion dollars for it....small change compared to what they're making exporting their shitty little cars duty-free into the US. How did this happen? China is terrified of that missile system and assured the south Koreans the north will never attack them. And the S. Koreans backed out of our agreement. Trump's charm-offensive with the Chinese leader didn't work...he tried but hardcore communists don't get charmed. So we have to face the reality that nothing is going to change there until we change it.

Pull our boys off the Korean peninsula ASAP. We redeploy them or bring them home out of harm's way. Now there is nothing keeping us from turning fat boy into a pile of charred pork if he ever tests another ICBM. Am I right? Oh yeah.

It's called POWER. Stopping China getting that power, stopping Russia getting that power. Having allies.

 

[Kondor3]

Don't kid yourselves . The Dmz would be a speed bump if NK wanted to invade . It's more symbolic/ political than anything .

Incorrect.

The DMZ would become a grease trap for North Korean fat that gets cooked-down as they attempt to invade.

 

[EatMorChikin]

I'm not as worried about Seoul as I am a nuke from N. Korea being launched at the US.

Of course, which is why I'm advocating pulling US forces off the Korean Peninsula and then informing Kimchi that if he tests another ICBM we will flatten and irradiate everything in a 10 mile radius around him.

You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.

Nope...we'd lose multiple aircraft to their AA batteries and might well lose a carrier if they got in a lucky shot. One ICBM, no MIRV, single-warhead....BANG out go the lights in the Kim palace. Let the Chinese figure out who their new leader will be....one thing you can count on...the new leader won't be threatening the US.

How would we lose aircraft? We would launch missiles from ships.

 

[Unkotare]

UOTE="EatMorChikin, post: 17507240, member: 52928"]You don't see a problem using nukes in that area? What we need to do, is level his nuclear facility. I'm sure it's already well mapped with drones. A naval strike group could level it in a couple hours.

Good we have the military in charge instead of any of the jokers here who think we should bail on South Korea or attack their nuclear facilities.

Seoul Korea, population over 10 million is little more than 10 miles or so from North Korea. North Korea would have heavy artillery reigning down on the city, along with their 1.2 million man army plus 500,000 in reserves.

Yes, we would defeat North Korea but, as General Mattis has said, the battle would be horrendous.

You just don't get it. Fat Boy Kim had to go on national television and ask his citizens to eat less food and give more to the army because they were starving, all while he stuffs his face with expensive imported cheese, imported whiskey, and smokes imported cigarettes. And you think those soldiers are going to run across the DMZ and die for him? ....[/QUOTE]


Yes, they would.

 

[Unkotare]

Lying Donald said North Korea would be easy and fixed quickly, so quickly, but Kim Jong Fatboy has been firing missiles off every other day since drumpf took office. What happened? I mean did your balls drop off?

No, he's just smarter than you are and listens to the experts.

N. Korea has artillery batteries pointed at Seoul that will destroy the city and kill a lot of people. Rushing into a war is stupid...even Trump can be taught that.

Seoul is S. Korea's problem....we've protected them for over 60 years FOR FREE and then they piss on our boots by siding with China?

$800 million/yr is not "free."

.

 

[Unkotare]

I'm not as worried about Seoul as I am a nuke from N. Korea being launched at the US.

Of course, which is why I'm advocating pulling US forces off the Korean Peninsula and then informing Kimchi that if he tests another ICBM we will flatten and irradiate everything in a 10 mile radius around him.

Which you know is just childishly pointless emoting.

.

 

[Unkotare]

Childish, self-indulgent fantasies of mindless destruction are about as useful to discussions of international relations as idiocy about "putting illegal immigrants into wood chippers!" is to discussions about illegal immigration.

.

 

[Tom Horn]

How would we lose aircraft? We would launch missiles from ships.

Conventional cruise-missiles are fine for attacking his residence but not powerful enough to take out hardened targets....the damage to the Syrian airbase runways showed that. A tactical nuke has the juice to do it and leave the area uninhabitable for years. That's how you do the Iran sites also....make them start from scratch in a different location. But again you have to extract our troops first so they can no longer be held hostage to NK bombardment.

 

[Tom Horn]

Good we have the military in charge instead of any of the jokers here who think we should bail on South Korea or attack their nuclear facilities.

So you feel a lifetime of selling insurance and scuba diving qualifies you to call ex-military in this thread "jokers"? So in your "professional" opinion you'd do nothing... I'd say the joke's on you.

 

[Dschrute3]

Leaving South Korea won't prevent North Korea from developing nukes capable of reaching the United States.

NK missiles can barely clear the launch pad. This is just like the bullshit lines W used to invade Iraq.

You should be more concerned about real threats.

Just clearing the launch pad puts South Korea in danger.

Let South Korea worry about that. It has one of the more advanced militaries in the world. It can defend itself. The US can go home now.

 

[Unkotare]

Leaving South Korea won't prevent North Korea from developing nukes capable of reaching the United States.

NK missiles can barely clear the launch pad. This is just like the bullshit lines W used to invade Iraq.

You should be more concerned about real threats.

Just clearing the launch pad puts South Korea in danger.

Let South Korea worry about that. It has one of the more advanced militaries in the world. It can defend itself. The US can go home now.

The US is there because it is in OUR national interest.