| Tango01 | 26 Sep 2016 10:42 p.m. PST |
"Preparing for war can sometimes help prevent one, and those preparations are probably helpful if one does start. Perhaps it's time to show North Korea what its forces would be in for, and to show our allies in the South that we are with them, seriously. The best course may be through field exercises conducted jointly by US and South Korean conventional forces, demonstrating operational capabilities to be used in the face of nuclear strikes. Often a second Korean War is imagined to end with US nuclear weapons destroying the North. True, this year United States has twice flown bombers over South Korea, perhaps to make sure that Kim remembers we have them. But it seems improbable that the US would use nuclear weapons in a war against the North, even if Kim Jong Un started the war by using atomic bombs…."
Main page
link Amicalement
Armand |
| Mako11 | 26 Sep 2016 11:09 p.m. PST |
Shouldn't we end the first war, before we begin the next? |
| nsolomon99 | 27 Sep 2016 3:11 a.m. PST |
Yeah, I thought it was just a truce that was negotiated? And is still in place, however shakily. |
| zoneofcontrol | 27 Sep 2016 5:06 a.m. PST |
WWI was ended by an armistice. That worked out well. |
| Noble713 | 27 Sep 2016 5:53 a.m. PST |
Having sat on the III MEF COC floor during UFG ( link )just this August….this article makes me LOL. That's really all I can say. |
 Legion 4  | 27 Sep 2016 8:15 a.m. PST |
The Korean War was not ended in '53. I was and is still only a truce. And a very unsettling one at that.
South Korea and it's allies[primarily the US under the UN flag], have been preparing for the next Korean War since '53 and beyond. With 22 months with a forward deployed Mech Bn '84-'85. And 2 tours on the DMZ. We trained and trained, and trained and prepared along with the ROKs constantly. As if the War was going to go hot … again … and very soon … I'd imagine that is pretty much the situation there today as well. |
| Lion in the Stars | 27 Sep 2016 10:09 p.m. PST |
I would imagine that the critical difference between the US using nukes in Korea or not depends NOT on whether the Norks use them or not, but on WHERE the Norks use them. Hit Korea or Japan with a nuke and it probably wouldn't be grounds for an immediate US response. Hit actual US soil with a nuke, though, it's on. |
| Mako11 | 27 Sep 2016 11:34 p.m. PST |
If Un decides to pop that cork, I suspect he may be on the receiving end of similar treatment, in order to ensure he can't do it again, and to make sure his nuke weapons and program are eliminated completely. I imagine many/most in the USA would demand that, since there will obviously be American casualties in that type of attack. |
| VVV reply | 28 Sep 2016 4:13 a.m. PST |
I don't see the USA using nukes against North Korea. |
| Legion 4 | 28 Sep 2016 10:33 a.m. PST |
I don't either, if for nothing else the fallout. In all directions. But you don't want Un to know that for sure … Take nothing off the table … |
thinks Mark's work is among the best available for all-around gaming and painting.
