EPTOn November 24 2010 11:19 Manifesto7 wrote:
Tell that to the troops that took Omaha and Utah.
Tell that to the troops that took Omaha and Utah.
you beat me to it.
"america came in an cleaned up the easy bits" wow.
North Korea Fires Artillery Rounds at South Korean Island…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
you beat me to it. "america came in an cleaned up the easy bits" wow. | ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
On November 24 2010 10:29 TyrantPotato wrote: 90% of all german casualties in WW2 were against russian forces. this statistic, while possibly accurate, would be due to the horrific campaign into russian soil, not from an epic german stand against the russian push back into germany. don't get your facts mixed up! | ||
|
No_Roo
United States905 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:20 jinorazi wrote: you beat me to it. "america came in an cleaned up the easy bits" wow. Oh my that is a serious case of Manifestowned. | ||
|
StayFrosty
Canada743 Posts
| ||
|
Adila
United States874 Posts
Anyway, there isn't going to be a war if China has anything to say about it. | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7581 Posts
| ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:20 yoplate wrote: That must have sucked. Although I don't think WW3 is going happen. China knows if it backs NK in this incident, world opinions going to turn against it. However, on the other side, declaring war on NK could be disastrous, because their leaders are pretty wacko, and they have a nuclear threat. I think, more importantly, is that China is undergoing huge development. They are industrializing at an astounding rate, and the trade business is booming. People are outright accusing China that they're purposefully keeping the value of their money low. Without going into a very in-depth detailing of an economic standpoint, I think it's quite reasonable to say that the economic incentives will be one of the biggest factors in any decision China decides to make in the near future. | ||
|
Lowkin
Canada232 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:19 Manifesto7 wrote: Tell that to the troops that took Omaha and Utah. Seriously, I am Canadian and I just recently visited Juno Beach which is 5 km from Omaha. I would probably crap my pants landing on that beach during D-day. I can't believe you are demeaning the US accomplishments in World War 2. Obviously they didn't win the war themselves like a lot of americans like to believe but they paid a heavy price and they where a huge contributing factor to the downfall of the Axis of evil. The Pacific was a hellhole that the US had to overcome as well. Also russia almost lost moscow before there harsh winter kicked in and the unprepared germans began to take a beating. | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
From the Gwynne Dyer article that someone alread posted: North Korea’s weapons are a long way from being state of the art. Its air force is a flying scrapyard: around 400 Russian MiG-17, MiG-19, and Mig-21 fighters or their Chinese equivalents (all designs that first flew in the 1950s or '60s), and only three dozen relatively modern Mig-29s that are reserved for the air defence of Pyongyang. It also has around 200 ground attack aircraft, most of them equally antiquated. ... No modern army can survive without air cover: the ability of aircraft to kill ground targets with high accuracy and in large numbers had grown a hundredfold since the Second World War. The South Korean and U.S. Air Forces have around 600 modern military aircraft available in South Korea, and the U.S. can reinforce that number almost without limit in very short order. http://www.straight.com/article-326388/vancouver/gwynne-dyer-scope-and-consequences-interkorean-war | ||
|
Gcubed
United States131 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:03 EpiCenteR wrote: Last I checked the goods they send to us are something like 5% of their gdp. Is that number factual? Just curious | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:19 Manifesto7 wrote: Tell that to the troops that took Omaha and Utah. Tell that to the Russian troops in Stalingrad. They would BEG you to be on Omaha Beach. D-day was EASY compared to most of the shit Russians had to do. Sorry. | ||
|
Vile Animus
United States34 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease The US gave ~11.3 Billion in aid to the russians, including 2,000 locomotives, 11,000 rail cars, 18,700 planes and hundreds of thousands of trucks. Thats about 14% of the russian airplane production and, most importantly, ~65% of trucks. Trucks aren't as sexy as tanks but no modern army gets far without the supply chain necessary to keep their tanks and troops moving forward. US casualties would have been massively higher without Russia holding the eastern front. Without a western front and western aid, Russia would not have made it to Berlin and would likely have fallen. That was sort of the point of forming an alliance. | ||
|
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:45 Vile Animus wrote: The Russians didn't exactly crush the Germans, they barely held them off. Theres not enough attention paid to the 20 million Russians that died in WW2, but to say they were primarily responsible for winning that war is ridiculous. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease The US gave ~11.3 Billion in aid to the russians, including 2,000 locomotives, 11,000 rail cars, 18,700 planes and hundreds of thousands of trucks. Thats about 14% of the russian airplane production and, most importantly, ~65% of trucks. Trucks aren't as sexy as tanks but no modern army gets far without the supply chain necessary to keep their tanks and troops moving forward. US casualties would have been massively higher without Russia holding the eastern front. Without a western front and western aid, Russia would not have made it to Berlin and would likely have fallen. That was sort of the point of forming an alliance. Yeah sure the aid helped, but Russia sacrificed the most to win the war. Are the people who funded fighting or the people that fought the "winners"? It really is a complicated question. American aid would have done nothing if millions of Russians didn't sacrifice their lives to destroy much of the German army. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:45 DannyJ wrote: Tell that to the Russian troops in Stalingrad. They would BEG you to be on Omaha Beach. D-day was EASY compared to most of the shit Russians had to do. Sorry. dude are you serious? you could have easily said, "what i meant was, the level of hardship and arduousness russians had to go through was more than what americans experienced, in my opinion" but instead you say something like that? grow up. might as well say, "tell that to the spartans who had to face 2 million persiasns with just 300 of them" | ||
|
Lancehead
Canada123 Posts
On November 24 2010 11:25 StayFrosty wrote: Fuckin' world war 3 is on the way gentlemen Yeah, the world against North Korea. It'll be over by Christmas.  | ||
|
lvatural
United States347 Posts
If a war ever did occur though, the interesting question isn't whether NK would lose but rather one of damage control. Despite technological impotence, NK does have the capability to level Seoul within a matter of hours...especially since NK would likely take a preemptive strike. Additionally what would happen to NK after it's all over? Reunification? Democratization of a separate nation? And how would China react to the situation? These are all what I'd like to know...not the actual "war" but the reformation that would occur in the aftermath. | ||
|
Kakera
United States419 Posts
| ||
|
Teraldent
United States89 Posts
| ||
|
night terrors
China1284 Posts
| ||
|
BiOAtK
United States13 Posts
Also, I don't think air superiority matters as much as in wars vs NK as it did against Iraq. NK is heavily tunneled; that negates some of the advantage of air superiority. A huge portion of NK is militarized; most people have gone through some form of basic training. Also, 1 guided rocket is cheaper than an aircraft, and can be fired robotically and automatically, while an airplane needs to be piloted and is extremely expensive. Also, NK would be fine with a long haul through war; they're a really militaristic state and have a very strong tyranny over their people. No protests, no political pressure, and they don't care about civilian casualties. The US and SK are both very politically motivated states. SK, of course, will do whatever it can to win the war (if it happens) but the US can pretty quickly be driven out of the war by the civilian political pressure. | ||
| ||
