according to ollie, japan has the constitutional right & the capabilities to take out missiles & their sites.
Japan Considers Strike Against N. Korea
- Thread starter AR182
- Start date
AR182 said:
I have fox on and also heard him say that, but by all accounts, they do not have ballistic missles capable of reaching NK.
He might have meant by plane, but the likelyhood of any such mission suceeding is slim. I mean, maybe, we/Japan could get a particular missle site on a suicide mission, but it's not like there's just one troublesome site causing all this uproar.
Or maybe he meant with our weapons on the island. But again, we better be a lot more capable and ready than we currently are if we wish to go to war with NK.
Iraqs army may have rolled over and played dead, but NK is a whole different story.
Iraqs army may have rolled over and played dead, but NK is a whole different story.
hopefully it doesn't come to this but i heard a few ex-military say that while nk will be harder, as long as the u.s. has air supremacy, nk will be no trouble.
hopefully it doesn't come to this but i heard a few ex-military say that while nk will be harder, as long as the u.s. has air supremacy, nk will be no trouble.
AR182 said:
No trouble? 'Harder?' Oh my.
Air supremacy, while nice to have, is in some(large) part neutralized because of the terrain in Korea. Mountain after mountain. Ridge after ridge. We had total control of the air in 1950 and it made little difference because of this reason.
I wonder where these ex-military guys get all this over-confidence. That war would be beyond horrible and would definitely be 'trouble.'
They have around 2,000 artillery pieces on the DMZ, all capable of reaching Seoul, almost all of our Army posts, some of our air bases and that would be before the follow-up invasion.
They have a one million man standing army and another 2 million or so subject to conscription if something breaks out.
While our military is the strongest in the world for now (China racing towards us), let's take a look at how much 'trouble' we've had against who and who we've handled with no trouble since 1941.
Korea-3 years-40 some thousand dead. Stalemate. Right back to the 38th.
Japan-won with nukes
Germany-won with enormous help from USSR
Vietnam-enough said
Grenada-success
Panama-success
Libya-bombing successful
Somalia-enough said
Serbia-good bombing campaign. no ground troops.
Iraq 1 - 3 day war. Iraq army gave up.
Iraq 2 - 3 week war. Iraq army gave up. 2500 dead and counting and 3 years later still there.
Afghanistan-still fighting the bushmen 4 years later
I'm trying to see where all this overconfidence is coming from. And with 150k troops in Iraq with another 15k in Afghanistan. What are these 'experts' smoking?
Hey, eventually we would probably win, but the cost would be staggering.
Last edited:
We must have all been tuned to Fox same time.
Saw Ollie's take also.
Question "IF" Japan did take out koreas bases do you think NK would attack SK in retaliation?
Can't see much threat of NK to Japan with our cruisers sitting in sea of Japan--but as Matt said before--if the shit ever hits the fan there--SK and our troops there will be the most vunerable and will take mass casualties within minutes of confrontation--but would north attack south if attack was coming from Japan?
Saw Ollie's take also.
Question "IF" Japan did take out koreas bases do you think NK would attack SK in retaliation?
Can't see much threat of NK to Japan with our cruisers sitting in sea of Japan--but as Matt said before--if the shit ever hits the fan there--SK and our troops there will be the most vunerable and will take mass casualties within minutes of confrontation--but would north attack south if attack was coming from Japan?
It seem strange this time with S Korea not wanting anyone over reacting. Compared to 1950 when they came a running. Hence the words and tone from Bush have changed to. Japan by treaty can not attack anyone. Believe if they do it's a act of war. They can defend them self only. So if attacked they can go like nuts. N Korea testing missiles in the sea is not a attack. At least no one has said it is. I can't blame S Korea from wanting to find another way. After all before we can act they stand to lose 1000's dead maybe 100000. Soul will take huge hit.
DOGS THAT BARK said:
Exactly. As I mentioned in this thread, or another recent thread, it's hard to say whether they would invade SK in response to Japanese action alone.
And also as I mentioned in a recent post, no way they would make their way across the Sea of Japan in any sort of invasion attempt. Would never work.
Good post.
djv said:
You're right about NK testing missles not being an attack, but I don't see it 'strange' at all that SK doesn't want anybody overreacting. Their entire society is at stake.
They came 'a running' in 1950 after a massive unprovoked invasion by the north, so don't really understand that one either.
Just stating how times have changed. And I do believe S Korea told or asked Bush to turn it down a little.
djv said:
I have little doubt. It's only their whole existence at stake. (only slightly exaggerated)
