"South Korea announces more defence cutbacks" Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Workbench Article Two of Hasslefree's Adventurers venture to Serbia...
Featured Profile Article Looking at the Soviet and U.S. token and dice sets for Battlefront's Team Yankee.
Featured Movie Review
|
| arealdeadone | 30 Jul 2020 10:25 p.m. PST |
South Korea has announced a fresh batch of defence cutbacks to help cushion economy from COVID. Total cutbacks now amount to $1.5 USD billion and biggest casualty is plan to equip latest series of AEGIS destroyers with advanced SAMs. link |
| Thresher01 | 30 Jul 2020 11:00 p.m. PST |
|
 aegiscg47  | 31 Jul 2020 6:26 a.m. PST |
Outside of the masses of artillery that North Korea has aimed at Seoul, there's not much for South Korea to fear. The North Korean air force and navy are miles behind them and will never catch up. There's not enough fuel to train their troops and the armor they have is woefully out of date. |
| USAFpilot | 31 Jul 2020 9:02 a.m. PST |
That's the thing about an arms race, if you're not careful, you will bankrupt your nation. |
| David Manley | 31 Jul 2020 10:21 a.m. PST |
South Korea isn't just concerned about the North. Keeping up with Japan sits high in their priorities and worries as well. |
| torokchar | 31 Jul 2020 11:14 a.m. PST |
So why are we going bankrupt to defend S. Korea??? |
| 15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 31 Jul 2020 3:26 p.m. PST |
So why are we going bankrupt to defend S. Korea???
It probably has less to do with N. and S. Korea than maintaining a presence there to counter boogeymen China. |
| McWong73 | 31 Jul 2020 6:42 p.m. PST |
The South Koreans spend a good chunk, IMHO a different paradigm than the debates around NATO spending. |
|
