What's new

North Korea ready to use nukes against the United States: Kim Jong Un

you mean shelling is not an invasion? NK destroyed two K9, and SK also suffered 20 or 30 casualties.
No, it is not. An invasion is an unauthorized trespass of borders BY PEOPLE, not things. Artillery is an attack, not the same. But we can get even more detailed. An invasion always have the accompanying intent of OCCUPATION and long term, so this disqualify a raid which is to get in then get out.
 
Ukraine received a massive amount of modern AT weapons,artillery,small arms and UCAVs by other countries. Even their own indigenous AT weapons are better than North Korea's.

And they even had better Air Defence than North Korea. Even their armored vehicles are far better than anything the North Korean's have.
You know what you can't buy though? Geography. Ukraine had to buy all that because it has a shit geography and is trying to deter Russia. North Korea only has to deter South Korea with an amazing defensive geography.
 
Didn't trump said to him my button is alot bigger than yours when KIm said red button is always on his table.
He seriously doesn't believe he can win a nuclear war against the US, however in a nuclear exchange US has more to lose then North which is already starving.
Kim knows this and hence leveraging it to gain anything out of it.
 
you mean shelling is not an invasion? NK destroyed two K9, and SK also suffered 20 or 30 casualties.
So, did CCP "Invaded" Taiwan back in 1958 when they bombard Kinmen and Matsu using Artillery??
 
You know what you can't buy though? Geography. Ukraine had to buy all that because it has a shit geography and is trying to deter Russia. North Korea only has to deter South Korea with an amazing defensive geography.
Do you even know what are you talking about??

To say Ukraine have shit geography to deter Russia is probably the most stupid argument people had. 50% of the current war result is thanks to Ukrainian Geography.

If it was not the hilly and muddy area in the North, Russia would have already rolled their tank into Kyiv probably on day 3 of the attack. If it was not for Dnieper River, Russia would have already broken thru Zaporizhya and attacking Odessa and Dnipro right now. The entire country of Ukraine is laid with Natural Defences. The 3 big rivers (Inhulets, Siversky Donets, Dnieper) flowing thru the West, East and South make sure any attacking force have to meet with bottleneck and funnel before they can further progress to each one. Siversky Donetsk river itself hold up the Russian for over 3 months taking Siverodonetsk, and they still unable to break thru the other end in Sloviansk......

I mean it's unusual to have 3 large rivers to run thru the entire course in the country, it's a geographical feature countries like US or China can dream of....
 
You annihilate the vast majority of enemy formations and force the rest to retreat or surrender. Going back to the status quo or signing a peace treaty with regime change or completely unify the country.
Or we can just send a smart bomb to kill Kim Jong Un and let God sort it out eh? The world is a better place without that dude anyway.
 
?You didn't,I did.
Of course it is "communist propoganda".
That's what they claim. And Saddam had Republican Guard and Special Republican Guard and Fedayin Saddam and this and that. How did they help him win the war against the allies in 1990 and 2003? They didn't.

That's what I'm talking about communist propaganda. They claim they have a million or so special forces. What kind of quality are these special forces and they are so numerous? What are the real numbers? It's silly.
Again mentioning Saddam Hussein:crazy: Look here kid. South Korea is not the US and North Korea is not Iraq. The military gap is far smaller than US-Iraq 1991.

"That's what I'm talking about communist propaganda. They claim they have a million or so special forces. What kind of quality are these special forces and they are so numerous? What are the real numbers? It's silly".

You are either a troll or suffer from dyslexia. Did you even bother reading what I wrote. You have not been a good student. They dont claim 1 million soldiers you troll. I wrote 180 000 just above. Did you bother reading it? What quality? I just described what 3 NK special force personnel did during the "1996 Gangneung submarine infiltration incident" You did not bother to read that one also? There you understand what kind of quality the 180 000 NK special forces are.

And South Korea has enough land and sea AA systems to defeat them. Of course some will definetely hit their targets,but still...
That is a big claim. Do you bother showing some sources that can confirm? North Korea has close to 1000 short range ballistic missiles.

South Korea has double the population of North Korea,man.
So what? Your claim was that South Korea could defeat and occupy North Korea. The attacker is needs a 3 to 1 advantage which is not present here.

I can't say about the artillery,but South Korea has significantly better quality armor. And a big numbers too.
Once again not enough to defeat North Korea let alone occupy it like you claim. Also look at the geography of North Korea.

Considering that a Syrian S-200 shot down a Israeli F-16. They may still be useful. Looks like you have not done your research properly. Why is the KN-06 not mentioned there? The KN-06 is superior the S-300 but inferior to S-400. Another failed argument of yours.

Article from 2017. Read it.


It's pretty much a good arguement,because both countries were ruled by a dictator,both had the "4th largest armies in the world" and both had mostly outdated weapon systems and equipment.

You're saying I'm ill informed,yet you can't see the massive technological difference between these two armies. And before you start mentioning "Vietnaaam Vietnaaam" or "Afghanistaaan" like some others do all the time,think about the poverty and tyranny millions of North Koreans have been enduring. Think about how so many try to get out of that country,every way they can and how many are just scared to do something. Or how many have been sent to labor camps and how many have been starving outside of Pyongyang. Why do I mention this? Because in case of a conventional war,I believe hundreds of thousands would try to find a chance to defect.
"It's pretty much a good arguement,because both countries were ruled by a dictator,both had the "4th largest armies in the world" and both had mostly outdated weapon systems and equipment".

Typical of you people to use that "dictator" argument lmao.... There is a reason your american masters have not fired a single bullet at North Korea since the Korean war.

Also we can see who is ill informed by the quality of the posts. No offence but you sound like a newbie when it comes to military and warfare concept.
 
You know you are retarded if you threat US with nukes.
 
You are either a troll or suffer from dyslexia. Did you even bother reading what I wrote. You have not been a good student. They dont claim 1 million soldiers you troll. I wrote 180 000 just above. Did you bother reading it? What quality? I just described what 3 NK special force personnel did during the "1996 Gangneung submarine infiltration incident" You did not bother to read that one also? There you understand what kind of quality the 180 000 NK special forces are.
I wasn't referring to you,there were reports on TV,mistaken or not,that NK claimed they had over 1,000,000 special forces. That was a few years ago.

Now,you might accuse me of stuff,but apparently you can't compare military hardware? And you always believe that the old "guerilla tactics" that worked in Vietnam or Afghanistan,would work in Korea? There are factors that would turn the war in favor of the South,if China and the US didn't interfere of course.

  • The superiority in weapons and equipment quality of South Korea
  • The fact that South Korea has double the population,hence could gather more men and women for the war effort.
  • The morale of the North,where millions would probably prefer to just defect to the South or see the regime collapse
  • The food and other supplies for the North that might be dwindling fast or stocked up for the elite only.
Against all that,the usual arguements are: "But the North are tougher 'cause they don't listen to K-pop,watch soap-operas and play PC games" or "they can fight a guerilla war because they have many tunnels and bunkers and mountains".

Eh...I don't think so. I mentioned Saddam again because he too boasted of having the world's 4th largest army and he too was a dictator and he too thought that his old Soviet equipment was great,until the coalition came and destroyed it.

So what? Your claim was that South Korea could defeat and occupy North Korea. The attacker is needs a 3 to 1 advantage which is not present here.

Depends. The defender might collapse faster. The attack might easier. We're talking about a country that has a big part,if not the majority of the population,displeased and fed up with the regime and life there.

Once again not enough to defeat North Korea let alone occupy it like you claim. Also look at the geography of North Korea.
It's not just the armor though,is it? it's also the jet fighters,the bombers,the attack helicopters,the AWACS,the Navy Fleet.

Considering that a Syrian S-200 shot down a Israeli F-16. They may still be useful. Looks like you have not done your research properly. Why is the KN-06 not mentioned there? The KN-06 is superior the S-300 but inferior to S-400. Another failed argument of yours.
How many S-200s have managed to shoot down Israeli F-16s? Just because it happened once or twice,doesn't mean that South Korean F-16s,F-15s and F-35s will be falling off the sky for fun.

The failed arguement is on your part. What's the credibility on the KN-06? It looks like one of those Iranian "alchemies".

You base your hopes on the fact that there were rare instances of modern aircraft being hit by old Soviet AA systems.

But in most theatres of war in recent times,such systems were just destroyed or bypassed by modern Air Forces.

Typical of you people to use that "dictator" argument lmao.... There is a reason your american masters have not fired a single bullet at North Korea since the Korean war.
Hey,pajeet...I don't have "american masters",unless you consider you have american masters just like some wankers accuse your country of having. What was Saddam? A benevolent leader? A loving president? What were the Kims? Nice and kind leaders? Forgiving and loving?

Also we can see who is ill informed by the quality of the posts. No offence but you sound like a newbie when it comes to military and warfare concept.
:rofl::rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Who said that? Abid! ABID! Yalaaaaa!

Ok uncle Abid,sure. Go back to the coffee shop and discuss PMLN politics with your friends.
 
You mean North Korea chose not to mess with the U.S. since the end of the Korean War. Cause we haven't seen another invasion since.
LOL. Hilarious comment. As far as North Korea is considered they slaughtered your sailors like sheep during the EC-121 shootdown :omghaha:

Not to mention this also:


Not North Korea but here is my fav one:


This was a master stroke, 241 gone poof in a single strike.
 
The quantity difference is not that big. North Korea has about 25,000,000 population. South Korea has double that. In case of a full mobilisation,the South Koreans could use more troops.

As for the differences in quality...just take a look:

North Korean Air Force

View attachment 868215

South Korean Air Force
(just the jet fighters)

View attachment 868216

North Korean Air Defence

View attachment 868217

South Korean Air Defence



View attachment 868218

If you check their current Navy surface fleets,North Korea is outdated and outgunned.

If you compare their tanks and armored vehicles,South Korea has a massive advantage. In logistics,reconnaisance,engineering and personal gear,the South Korean army has the advantage.

Even the land forces air component is far superior to the NK's one:

View attachment 868231


It's not a communist propaganda show either

View attachment 868232

View attachment 868234

Dayum, South Korea is better equipped than most NATO members. Heck at this point SK might even have stronger conventional military capabilities than Russia.
 
Dayum, South Korea is better equipped than most NATO members. Heck at this point SK might even have stronger conventional military capabilities than Russia.
"Heck at this point SK might even have stronger conventional military capabilities than Russia".

Let us not go that far. They are every very strong conventionally no doubt. Worldwide they would rank 6th behind US, Russia, China, India and Japan.

Global firepower seems to be pretty spot on:
 
"Heck at this point SK might even have stronger conventional military capabilities than Russia".

Let us not go that far. They are every very strong conventionally no doubt. Worldwide they would rank 6th behind US, Russia, China, India and Japan.

Global firepower seems to be pretty spot on:

I'm sure GFP has accurately predicted Russia's performance in Ukraine.
 
Back
Top Bottom