| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tokki
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2004 8:06 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Im already down south:) WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY out of artillery range heheheh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kidcharlemagne wrote: |
| it's estimated that the whole event would last for maybe 30 minutes and approximately 1~2 million people would die - the majority in seoul. |
Actually, it's estimated that an offensive by North Korea ten years ago, back when America's military machine was less effective and South Korea had less armor and heavy weapons, that an all out offensive by North Korea would result in about 50,000 Korean fatalities (much military) and a million wounded or otherwise injured (the vast majority being minor such as nutritional issues or flying glass). This assuming NK actually targeted Seoul civilian structures as valid targets.
In the last ten years, the NK has been heavily degraded as they still have the same 1970s used hand-me-downs from the old Soviet empire which have not been maintained, the U.S. now can lob an artillary shell by satellite to within a yard of a target, and has introduced many other technologies to increase the effectivess. All while South Korea has invested in increased armor, planes, and artillary just to name a few.
Now you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
And what about the North's atomic bombs? Even if they have only one or two, that would still create a great deal of destruction.
That said the North would likely only start a war if it felt that one was unavoidable. It has much more to gain by bad behaviour and threats than war with the U.S. which would result in their destruction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I have it first hand from a journalist i know who actually toured and filmed the Geumho/gangbyon nuclear facility in N.Korea. They definitely have Putonium and uranium- but its very unclear wether they have the expertise to make the warhead. They have the missiles, but the technology? Hmmm.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tokki
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
| I have it first hand from a journalist i know who actually toured and filmed the Geumho/gangbyon nuclear facility in N.Korea. They definitely have Putonium and uranium- but its very unclear wether they have the expertise to make the warhead. They have the missiles, but the technology? Hmmm.... |
Its very unlikely they have the technology to make the nukes small enough to be put on a missile. If they have a nuke it will be huge like the bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The plne that will carry those will never get past the DMZ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
| I have it first hand from a journalist i know who actually toured and filmed the Geumho/gangbyon nuclear facility in N.Korea. ... |
Really? North Korea now allows foreign journalists to tour and film their nuclear facilities? Mind providing the name of this journalist? Also the story that he published about this? One would assume that he published an article, otherwise why would he have gone up there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
