why USA doesnt attack north korea
-
you are a genius.Originally posted by skid:it would be so easy just to nuke them and eleminate the problem -
i was talking s**t dude. i don't think we'll ever nuke anyone else.Originally posted by dragg:nuke them?
knn, how about the nuclear fallout? you think china, japan, south korea and the neighbouring countries will just sit there and let the americans do it? -
Let's look at the beginning and the end of the Korean War (for both sides) and then compare:Originally posted by martin_lim85:then for the fu.ck is DMZ at 38th parallel for?
1)Beginning
USA first entered the war with the purpose of toppling North Korea. To destroy the North Korean communist. For this purpose, USA lead the whole UN army incursion into North Korea.
China entered the war LATER, after USA troops had already overrun almost the whole of North Korea up until the border with China. The goal of China's army was to drive the USA out of North Korea. To visualise this, you must know that Korea is a peninsula. The peninsula was divided into North Korea and South Korea. To the north of North Korea, it's adjoining with China. I know some of you don't have much knowledge of the geography, but you can imagine Korea as the Malaysian Peninsula, and China's location as Thailand. Then North Korea would be like from KL onwards until the border with Thailand. Can visualise?
2)End
The war ended with a cease-fire at the 38th parallel, which was almost at the original border between North Korea and South Korea. In other words, after China entered the war, the whole USA led UN army was driven completely out of North Korea. At some point, USA army retreated almost to the southern part of South Korea (like JB in Malaysia). Then the cease-fire agreement was reached, with the border set at 38th parallel.
3)Comparison
So now, do you think USA succeeded or failed in the Korean War? And don't talk to me about casualties. The definition of success and failure is whether the goal of the war was achieved or not. -
ever heard of sarcasm?Originally posted by the.owl:you are a genius.
-
Oh ya, to reply to the topic:
USA doesn't attack North Korea because of several reasons:
1)Main reason: North Korea has nothing for USA to grab. No oil, no nothing. No benefits.
2)North Korea is a tough nut to crack. NOW that it has nuclear bomb, USA will not attack. USA attack only countries without nuclear bomb. That's why Iran is also frantically developing nuclear bomb. If Iran is stupid enough to believe USA and gives up on nuclear bomb, it will be the next country invaded.
3)Other major countries around North Korea (except Japan) doesn't support USA to attach North Korea. Some will even resists it. -
not usa attack n.korea first. n.korea attack s.korea first. den usa and un help s.korean attack back n.korea. china den come in to help. at that time, russia and china were both communist country. s.korea was influence by them.
den usa and un troop attack s.korea right up to yalu river, this is when the communist att n.korea back to the capital , seoul. den usa and un force them back to 38th parallel line.
btw, russia is alr nt a communist country. china has alr open up. now only n.korea was still a communist country. n.korea fire her first nuclear bomb altho warnings were given to them. the nuclear bomb was near south korea. s.koreans can heard the nuclear bomb sound . so this is a threat to them.
however, if usa and other country were to attack n.korea, we would see many nuclear missiles flying ard . then it would be the end of the world. -
1 nuke should settle it ma.. caue its safer , most cost effecient n effective. Besides, N.Korea did say they will launch nuckear missles, n since they CLAIMED they detonated the nuke US have to first strike to prevent the launch. Hence i Support war on N.Korea.
btw... i support War on ALL by the US of A .
-
and mi wonder if they surf sgforums during official hours or not and claimed that it is part of their north korean army job too...hahahaOriginally posted by the Bear:even if it doesn't have nukes.. think about it..
the exodus of all those people.. to PRC and to S Korea..
S Korea WILL be attacked no matter who is doing the attacking because the guys running the DPRK are nuts..
DPRK implodes and imagine.. the whole bloody country is already starving... then with total anarchy and the rule of law breaks down totally... one whole bloody country flooding into Russia, PRC and S Korea...
the whole place will be destabilised to heck and then some -
just ignore himOriginally posted by skid:ever heard of sarcasm? 
-
Simple: Korea has nothing of interest to USA.
Also, with a country so drunk with EGO, it's best not to stur them up further - they won't hesitate to launch their nuclear weapons.
And we all, will not come out any better for the confrontation.
Ignore and closely monitor their activities - if they get out of hand, then I'm afraid the world will need to intervene in every way possible. -
im looking forward to another Cold War
but im not sure if the DPRK really mean war if sanctions is implemented..which would otherwise prove a great experience over here
-
War is not to see who is right, but to see who is left. Take note of that before thinking of war.
Let me deal with a few things I read:
1) Nuking N. Korea into a glass carpark.
A VERY NOT GOOD IDEA. Not only it is cruelty and will be condemned by the entire world, but nukes will have severe enviromental, geo-political and humanitarian complications, especially for US close ally, South Korea,
Heck, becuase of the A-bombs dropped in 1945, everyone agreed to a certain extent that nuclear weapons cannot be used in conventional war. Otherwise, Vietnam would have been a smothering crater during the Vietnam war.
Anyone who thinks it is easy to drop a nuclear warhead without reprecussions needs to read more about what happened to the people that survived the blast in Hiroshima and Nagasaki; What happens after nuclear bombs detonate; What happens to the country that can have the heart to commit such an act of terror.
And also if 1 or 5 nukes don't ensure the removal of all of N.Korea nuclear capabilities, it most likely safe to say bye-bye to US West Coast.
2) The very idea of attacking N. Korea
Its a safe bet that US military is stretched to its limit with the Iraq war. Sure, they got a few million reserved, but financially, it is not profitable. Instead US would more likely sell weapons to Japan and allow Japan to build up a military to combat N.Korea.
BUT China and Russia both will not be happy. (Chinese-Jap relations are pretty sour, and Russia won't like bombs going off) S.Korea may not be happy either, REMEMBER that families in S. Korea and N.Korea are still separated, and it will take a few more generations to purify the population.
Plus, N. Korea have no oil, Russia is the ppl with oil, deep in the Siberian desert, and tons of nukes that were developed during the cold war.
And you got the Pacific Ocean, and the closest military base is Hawaii (or Alaska). The most US can do is shell and bomb the sh*t out of N. Korea, and say bye-bye to the West coast.
3) Prospekt USA
I personally am totally against war of any kind. USA flaunts its power by taking Afganistan and Iraq in a matter of weeks. But USA is having a hard time keeping the resistance down. Terror attacks risen since then.
The first reason Mr. Bush gave is that Saddam is hiding WMDs, and is asking him to disarm something Saddam doesn't have in the first place, if you are talking about nukes btw, since the most he got is biological weapons. US would attacked Iraq anyway even if Saddam did disarm non-existant WMDs, because of the oil, glorious oil.
After sometime, no WMDs, so Mr. Bush declared Saddam as an insane, cruel dictator. We all can say he is, but now Iraqis have to fear for their lives still.
And an insult to injury, Bush applies 'damage control' by saying America is promoting Democracy in the Middle East, with Tanks! War justified!
Multiply by annual tropical storms damaging infrastructure and the recontruction after Katrina, one would wonder where did Bush pull out so much money from, and still is able to mantain the military budget. My theory is that he is pulling money from scientific progress, education and health to fund the war.
In summary, it is too costly to wage another war. USA have too much to lose when it already is 'bleeding like mad'. N. Korea has little to lose however, and would gladly test the effects of a nuclear bomb detonating in downtown San Francisco if it has a reason to retaliate.
So to answer topic: Why USA doesn't attack N. Korea:
Because Bush haven't got enough money and a not good enough reason to attack N. Korea.
Apologies for all spelling error, I drank too much coffee.[/b] -
brrrrr...Originally posted by ceecookie:im looking forward to another Cold War
but im not sure if the DPRK really mean war if sanctions is implemented..which would otherwise prove a great experience over here 
war, particularly Nuclear War, will screw up world economy big time...
we might end up eating sand here... -
even in a head to head confrontation (DPRK vs ROK only), im confident that the Republic Of Korea would prevail against the crazy North... i mean, the Korean People's Army.
the North has severe budget limitations, spending only 5.2174billion or 22.9% of its GDP in FY02 (Source), with the ROK spending 21.06 billion or 2.5% of its GDP in FY 05 (Source).
this big difference in budget would lead to a few problems, namely the sustainability of the Korean People's Army in a protracted war and of course, how high, or rather low, tech its military is, and how well they are armed and trained.
the modern battlefield is ruled by the Air Force. the ROKAF has a modern Air Force, which fields advanced fighters like the KF-16, KAI A-50, F-15Ks, and the not so advanced F-5s, F-4s.
the North's airforce, is a mere air farce. although it fields about twice as many aircraft, they are mostly obsolete types with only 20 MiG-29s. how well these pilots are trained is certainly questionable, with sources stating that due to severe aircraft fuel shortages, their pilots receive less than 10 hours of flight training per year. translation: these flying tin cans would be swatted out of the skies by the ROKAF if the KPA has enough fuel to get them flying in the first place.
however, 70% of the active KPA's forces are stationed near the DMZ and artillery guns are in range of Seoul in secure bunkers. if they have enough ammo, this would mean that the KPA can either flatten Seoul, or attempt to take Seoul in the opening hours of another Korean War. although the KPA is numerically superior, the ROKHRF can call up the reserves, and with technologically superior weapons, should be able to stand up against the onslaught by the crazy North.
not to mention that the US has forces stationed there, the Japanese are doing some sabre rattling, and China is in the midst of modernizing itself and one would imagine how likely it is to support the DPRK, when it has problems in it's backyard too.
the delusional Kim doesnt know how badly he is going to die if he starts a war. -
USA doesnt operate alone. if it wants to war, it has to get its allies to help.
if the us and its allies are determined to topple kim jong il, those fu.cking communists are as good as gone. -
no.they are not.they have no intentions to invade N.korea..they wanted to settle things peacefully.ok.just imagine it.its USA attack,N.korea would TEST THEIR NEUCLEAR WEAPONS on USA.just imagine a neuclear war.lols.then if it was successful in overthrowing USA,they would try to threaten other countries with their neuclear weapons.lols.Originally posted by valentinoo:they attacked iraq for the same reason..and cant wait to attack iran again for the same reason...
they scared of getting their A$$ kicked by the north koreans? -
1)NK has nothing.
2)NK will launch counter offensive ( if no nukes ) against SK becos of US troops based there.
3)NK will not nuke SK but Japan and parts of West Coast of USA ( if NK missles can work ).
4) Once USA attack NK , other nations like Iran will immediately rush out their own nukes.
5) US cannot afford another batte front, unless they use draft system.
ok so far that is what comes to mind -
this is so funny.Originally posted by fifteen:no.they are not.they have no intentions to invade N.korea..they wanted to settle things peacefully.ok.just imagine it.its USA attack,N.korea would TEST THEIR NEUCLEAR WEAPONS on USA.just imagine a neuclear war.lols.then if it was successful in overthrowing USA,they would try to threaten other countries with their neuclear weapons.lols.
how r they going to do it?
known North Korean Ballistic Missiles
Taepodong 1 -- 2000km
Taepodong 2 -- 4000/4500km
Nodong 2 -- 2000km
SCUD - up to 700km, depending on variant
the Taepodong 2 is the only missile capable of reaching US, therefore, lets take a closer look at it.
2 stage variant - 4000km
3 stage variant - 4500km
it can reach Alaska, and Hawaii, no further. its range can be extended to reach the western half of the US if it has a significantly lighter payload, however, please allow me to remind u that the US did invent the Patriot missile system.
and, to add a little bit more spice to this discussion, the Taepodong 2 FAILED after only 35 - 40 seconds after a test launch. so, how sure r u that the DPRK has the capability to threaten the US? the North Korean scientists were pretty sure of their Taepodong 2 missile when they did the test launch.
the real question is, r u buying too much into the crazy North's propaganda?
so, seeing these crazies have doubtful capabilities, i think they'd have a better chance if they hire some suicide bombers and fly em over to the US to detonate a dirty bomb or two, Al Qaida style.
and btw, wats your age? -
USA did attack North Korea already!!!
I heard from news that North Korea kana nuclear attack few days ago, I think USA dropped Nuclear Bombs at North Korea, just like what it did in World War I -
When USSR disintergrated, lots of their nuclear weapons were being smuggered or secret sold by corrupted leaders to other countries.Originally posted by NiteSg:if NK decides to nuke SG...
end of Singapore..
half of JB might be destroyed...
Indonesia and neighbouring countries will be affected by the radiation.. and many more millions will die...
What USA fears is not N.Korea's self-developed nuclear weapons.
Its always been suspected by many historians and military experts that nuclear technology from USSR were being bought by the Middle East and possibility N.Korea at the end of the Cold War.
If true, N.Korea is only putting an act by pretending to develop atomic bombs. They might already have hydrogen bombs from the USSR.
That can easily destroy a quarter of Malaysia! -
Originally posted by Ristar:
wouldn't it be more interesting to see a missile landing on Seoul or even Tokyo?
this is so funny.
how r they going to do it?
[b]known North Korean Ballistic Missiles
Taepodong 1 -- 2000km
Taepodong 2 -- 4000/4500km
Nodong 2 -- 2000km
SCUD - up to 700km, depending on variant
the Taepodong 2 is the only missile capable of reaching US, therefore, lets take a closer look at it.
2 stage variant - 4000km
3 stage variant - 4500km
it can reach Alaska, and Hawaii, no further. its range can be extended to reach the western half of the US if it has a significantly lighter payload, however, please allow me to remind u that the US did invent the Patriot missile system.
and, to add a little bit more spice to this discussion, the Taepodong 2 FAILED after only 35 - 40 seconds after a test launch. so, how sure r u that the DPRK has the capability to threaten the US? the North Korean scientists were pretty sure of their Taepodong 2 missile when they did the test launch.
the real question is, r u buying too much into the crazy North's propaganda?
so, seeing these crazies have doubtful capabilities, i think they'd have a better chance if they hire some suicide bombers and fly em over to the US to detonate a dirty bomb or two, Al Qaida style.
and btw, wats your age?[/b]
How reliable is the Patriot when it shot down one of its own aircraft in Iraq before? -
I iz a little concerned of the comments here.
I will try to watch more Korean drama to help promote world peace. -
yeah right. if the patriot can successfully intercept a tiny aircraft, it can easily destroy a large missile. and, accidents happen all the time, especially so with the yankees. considering the number of sorties the USAF and the allied forces fly in Iraq, i think we can safely call that an isolated accident, can we not?
wat? u mean patriots shoot down allied aircraft everyday? no? one accident and u condemn it?
so... if a REC accidentally used his M16S1 to shoot his compatriot, is it an unreliable weapon?
tsk tsk tsk.
the Taepodong 2 is estimated to be able to carry up to 500kg of payload only. i'd say that it would be more interesting if artillery guns shell the city. however, that post was written in reply to a seriously ill informed forumite. -
wow i dint know there r some singaporeans who actually read up bout political Shits..good job
