US General warns “We could lose against North Korea

No one is shilling except you. Stating the fact that the US military is a vastly more effective force than the NK military is not the same thing as supporting ZOG wars. It's obvious you aren't from here. Leave.

Surprisingly the news did name the general. Lieutenant General Jan-Marc Jouas. Here's his picture. He looks like a soft queer and his defeatist language makes him look soft even more. He's a retired general from the Chair Force. He is literally an arm chair general.

Why should anyone believe someone who doesn't actually know how to fight a war? Or news coming from a country that's slipping more and more into (((globalism))) like Australia? All of this nervous shilling from the news tells me the President is making all the right decisions.

Has the US lost truly it's edge tech-wise?
Is their military nothing but hot air and bluffs?
Can Norks manage to repel a US invasion?

Only one way to find out! Whatcha all waiting for?

It's not that we haven't won a war since WWII, it's that we never fought a real war since WWII unless you wanna count Vietnam. Even then, as it's been stated a million times by a million different people, we didn't lose the Vietnam War. We just ended up walking the hell away from it. All we've done since WWII is bomb the fuck out of zipperheads and dunecoons. Our armed forces lost their edge, ontop of that it's a ludicrously over-glorified welfare program at this point. Out of all the Vets I've talked to and met, only a couple saw combat. The others were "deployed", aka they go overseas to Europe/Japan to fuck the natives and cause trouble or they go to goatfuckerland where they stand around a bunch of rocks for a year. And funnily enough, the vets who saw combat were actually extremely redpilled people ontop of that, one of them is even trying to air the kikes dirty laundry with all the fucked up shit he saw in the ME by writing a book. Ask anybody in the military how often they do drills and exercises, let alone training with their fucking weapons. They barely do. At all. Most of their time is spent doing different jobs on base, with the rest of their time spent doing seminars and presentations on evil yt and how women and trannies are horrifically abused. There were a few sources, don't quote me on this because I don't remember which, that even flatout stated that your typical range-jockey is more proficient in firearms and even basic tactics than your typical ZOGbot. Even the elite forces are completely fucking pozzed to hell and back. Our military is completely and utterly neutered, our entire military strategy book now revolves entirely on launching as many million dollar missiles as we possibly can to take out 1 or 2 fucking dudes pissing on sand dunes. All the fish-heads would have to do is send out a hundred different rice farmers in different parts of the country and we'd be utterly bankrupted in a week, wouldn't even have to fire a fucking shot. That's why we'd lose. We turned our nation's pride and joy into another government sector job

Jesus Christ how horrifying. But North Korea can't possibly beat the US. They're tech level is still in the 1959s for the most part. Can you imagine the embarrassment that the US would face if they lost to fucking North Korea?

Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy lmao

They can only lose due to sabotage by their own generals, corrupted by the globalists…

Same reason US would never win against Russia: slavs could take millions of dead soldiers, US would shit its pants and go cry to mommy after first 100 thousand dead.

devil dog here
this is horrifyingly accurate.
the vast majority of the army, navy airforce and even usmc is made of up of poggiest of pogs.
compared to the usmc the other branches are disgusting trash and never doing anything remotely combat related.
Marines are a bit different, but it entirely depends on your unit and how much your sergeants actually care about being combat ready. USMC still holds the every marine a rifleman mentality more than other branches, but its not where it should be.
other branches also are nasty as fuck with their PT. but even fuckin USMC admin PT to an acceptable level

100 year old gun is just as good at killing people as any new design. You can disable any armor with hand-held rocket launcher using appropriate warhead (there are triple shaped charge warheads, they fuck up anything and everything head on). You may not be able to detect stealth planes with 60's radars from 100 miles but they're still perfectly adequate for doing it from 50 miles.

South Korea can turn to a glassed plain for all I care. I only give a shit about white nations.

...

Nigger, Best Korea is a communist state, they don't surrender until after every single last one of them is dead.

trips of Satanic truth

He means that we didn't 'lose' in the sense that we couldn't have won; we easily could have. We didn't attack North Vietnam, we didn't destroy the food supplies, we didn't do anything about the dissenting South Vietnamese. Our guys just sat there, preventing Vietcong advance, until the anti-war kikes/faggots got their wish and we pulled out turning all the territory over to the commies. The war could have been won if our military might had actually been summoned, but it wasn't, we hardly even 'fought'- it was only token resistance.

Neither USA nor Russia could destroy the other via conventional means, only through nuclear war. It's tough to say who would be dominant in Europe in a WWIII scenario, at least for me, idk.

Can you imagine the embarrassment if if Saudi Arabia lost to Yemen?

If they were connected by land then Russia had a solid chance of winning by using well tested zerg rush strategy. And if that didn't pan out, it had 100% chance of winning war of attrition, simply because America would surrender first due to populace pressure.

If the yanks went to war with NK they'd have many allies with them UK, ANZAC and JPN would all have boots on the ground.

Their will be a war within the U.S.

if ten years of drought didn't get best Korea to depose there leader, why would war famine? In all likely hood they would eat each other just as commies do.

Literally common knowledge of how dangerous fags are when they're allowed to congregate freely and openly.

Gay Rape Gangs. Only reason they didn't get the farmers guest was because they sacrificed his concubine, who was so badly raped/abused by the fags that she died.

Sodomites have no recourse to demand we condone their perversion, it's unsanitary (read public health hazard), unnatural and fruitless (a mockery of fruitful sexual acts), and violates the moral law of God.

Say no to 'tolerance'.

wouldn't it be a repeat of the vietnam war
us can't bomb cities becuase humanitarianism
us must triple check guys walking around with guns without uniform before engaging because muh geneva
no matter how many factories you bomb it doesn't matter as all weapons and ammo will be made in china and smuggled into best korea
meanwhile commie vangaurds in american colleges will sabotage the war effort
and of course the eternal will profit from every new military contract and skim of what should result in beter gear for troops

but that is besides the point why even invade best korea speaking from a moral point of view
best korean are commie ant people if they were going to depose fattie in charge it would have happened, during an invasion they will charge the invaders with knives till the last woman
how many casualties can the us take before it would face a rebellion at home over some shit penisula in asia

the only logical reason to invade best korea is if (((they)) want to jump to a new host and need to destroy all the expansive weapon platforms of the us first so they can't get shoahed by the host they sucked dry

you play too many video games.
Soldiers are people too. If there's enough reason to, they'll revolt. The same goes for the US. if ordered to fire on US civilians on US turf, most of them would revolt.

its a lot different if another country is bombing the fuck out of them. especially a country theyve been told since birth is weak and pathetic and that someday theyll consume in holy nuclear fire.
Then they see their leader is powerless to protect and feed them.

Like there was revolt in RKKA. Like there was revolt in Vietnam guerilla.

Don't be so egocentric you dumbfuck burger. The life in your immediate surroundings is not representative of the life on the rest of the planet.

you mean like the soviets revolted when they were sent into entrenched german machine guns with 1 rifle per 3 men in stalingrad
commies don't get moral problems, stalin lost 20% of his population in wwII didn't even blink, for a foreign invasion you'll never get to that level in the us

or look at the khmer rouge in cambodia that was some assfuckery that would even make the soviets cry

This. The average hwhite European/Westerner has become so cucked he thinks every humanoid on the planet is as much of a spineless piece of shit coward like he is. That's where the white women fuck shitskins meme come from. You are weak, you can't be butted to protect what you love for whatever excuse and the bitches know it.

To be fair though only 8-11 million died to frontline-related incidents, the rest were civilians that starved to death or got bombed, and most of it came from Stalingrad. But yeah that didn't made them surrender. When you do that shit to slavs it only makes them angrier.

t. ARMYCUCK

Losing is a vague term. We could be nuked if we do something or nothing at all. Neighboring countries could be nuked. The Chinese could help North Korea. We could most certainly destroy Pyongyang, but then this would be an excuse to stir up resentment in countries sympathetic to North Korea. If the US got nuked, we would hurt, but North Korea alone couldn't finish the job.

Serbia lost the war because the US destroys all civilian infrastructure when they're off the leash, then proceeds to threaten the leadership with 100% death and destruction of all the remaining parts including wanton deliberate slaughter of civilians.
Before the aircraft carriers showed up North Korea could destroy the standing forces stationed there in about 4 hours or so and even now with more troops stationed the sheer amount of artillery guns they have ensures that short of bringing the nukes out it's going to be a long and drawn out meat grinder, which US could actually lose. All that "40 year old tech" nonsense is bullshit since we also use 40 year old tech but refurbished with some fancy stuff every now and again.

Council on Foreign Relations, in the video. Slight offshoot but obviously whats being referenced.

We could simply use Neutron Bombs to kill every last person, while still leaving their infrastructure intact. The USA might have sold out to The NWO and Globalist cucks, but that doesn't mean our (((masters))) would want to lose to Norks.

ZAP
kek, even meters and meters of earth won't protect against ol' neutron

...

This is why I keep telling you faggots it will never happen. No political puppet wants that on their wiki page, NK is more useful as a bogeyman to justify military spending and development. It also serves other purposes beyond the scope of this thread.

...

watch it pal they'll see the big board

...

FAKE NEWS

Reported for kike shill.

You can be as ass mad as you like Russian but the United States technological advantage makes losing a war currently impossible. The largest air force in the world is the US air force the second largest is the US navy. If the rest of the world combined it's naval fleet it would be just about as large as the United States.

Yeah Serbia lost the war is the point. Who ever else thinks themselves hard is going to lose the next war.

Are you guys retarded? So-called "neutron bombs" are normal nuclear bombs, except optimized to produce more of fast neutrons as opposed to just shitting out ton of gamma radiation. Neutrons have much worse penetration than gamma rays. It causes more manageable irradiation because it's concentrated on the surface.

Paris Peace Accords dumb fuck. The North and South agreed to a Korea style cease fire. Lasted for two years. We backed it by saying should the North invade the South we would give the South material aid. The leftists in government voted to defund that, and the North took the opening and attacked the South knowing we wouldn't help.

We won the war. It was the follow up where we failed thanks to the fucking pinkos.

Translation?

The issue here is that the situation is one in which the USA can't win.

An invasion of North Korea would be a prelude to war with China. That's why the USA wants North Korea, so they have a vassal state with a land border on China.

Now the first problem is that over the half century or so the nation has been under siege it has built a staggering and ludicrous artillery network throughout the border region the majority of which is not aimed at US positions but at South Korean civilian centres.
Seoul is in range of this artillery and is one of the most densely populated areas on Earth with its metropolitan area comprising around a quarter of the total South Korean population. The wider Seoul Capitol Region comprises fully half the population.

The second the conflict starts that artillery is going to turn Seoul into the worlds largest mass grave.
At that point the USA will have lost South Korea.
Conservative estimates put casualties in the region of 10% of South Koreas population dead or dying in the first few hours.
While the US forces will be able to destroy some of the artillery positions and deploy anti-artillery equipment to mitigate some of this, a lot of those emplacements have been designed specifically to counter the USAs favoured tactics for dealing with artillery. Meaning they're built into terrain that US bunker busting equipment can't deal with, lot of mountains in North Korea and the Norks have had a lot of time to work on this.
Meaning a lot of those artillery emplacements will only stop firing when they run out of ammo or food and many speculate they're more likely to run out of food than ammunition.

The US forces will meanwhile have little trouble penetrating deep into North Korea and rampaging about unchecked, even if they prove unable to penetrate much of the mountain situated artillery bunkers.
They'll take Pyongyang with minimal effort most likely.
But they'll be doing it alone as projections for desertion among South Korean forces are high. Extremely high.
When Seoul is reduced to rubble you'll see troops deserting to look for family or friends. Or just to try and assist in the rescue of survivors. Only way to mitigate this will be restricting troops access to outside communications but once the communication blackout comes down they'll know somethings up.

Another problem the US forces will face is resupply.
With Seoul gone the nation will be in chaos even if its government survives. Millions of refugees will be fleeing the north of the country and Seoul itself.
And theres a good chance they'll blame the USA, meaning the US troops will face hostility from South Korean citizens and possibly its military. This will make it difficult for US forces to continue to make use of road and port infrastructure in the area as they'll need to commit troops to security.
And this is before we even get down to the issue of the Norks having targeted anything vaguely roadlike along with the railways.

The USA will crush the North there's no doubt about that.
But it's unlikely they'll be able to hold the North and South through the chaos the conflict creates.
In the North they'll have an extremely hostile population who are convinced the yanks are there to commit genocide and are quite happy to suffer to spite the yank.
In the South they'll have a humanitarian crisis and an angry population used to large amounts of decadence who are suddenly without even the most basic luxuries and who are likely to riot because the emergency shelter doesn't have soft toilet paper or modern electronics for them to use.

And we ain't even touched Chinas inevitable interventions.

The surface buildup doesn't account for the neutrons that aren't scattered through the surface material which are in fact deeply penetrating like gamma rays as they have no charge. Unless you have actual shielding, you're gonna get cooked.

Go crack open a physics book, dumbass.

How about you do so, cunt. Do you know anything about how charges work and interact with matter? Unless you are passing the neutrons through a hydrogen rich medium you aren't slowing them down any time soon.

trashman.jpg

War speculation is an absolute waste of time

Checked
Water slows and stops them , concrete does pretty good , dirt does ok but not ideal.
Neutron bombs are no joke
Was Sam (( (Cohen))) a yid? If so then yeah he probably lied about the capabilities of his bomb. If he was a gentile then I'd trust his word and his weapon to do what he said it does

The amount of butthurt and denial ITT due to a simple and factually correct sentence in the OP is quite something. You'd think this isn't Holla Forums but just another online forum full of cableTV-watching ZOGbots.

Absolute low-effort trash.

Newfags:America does not win wars anymore, it 'manages' wars and Vietnam was the first big instance of this, ROE prevents any kind of decisive victory with the express purpose of extending the war as long as possible. If a de-kiked chain of command is present and the ranks are purged of faggots, trannies and niggers/spics in officer position, the US military will be unstoppable.

Concrete is ok but you can't have windows. Shielding is no joke and they don't like leaving holes for a reason. Shall I post physical samples from our nuclear vitrification studies? I'll have to dig them out.

ww3 cannot be avoided
norks are the trigger point
china and russias 5th/6th gen weaponry wont be ready until 2025 or later
if trump strikes now russia and china aren't ready
he can take it all and win the whole damn thing
our current weaponry is being tested and perfected for combat use as we speak

Going further into this.
The biggest killers of US troops in this conflict are liable to waterborne disease, starvation, disease/food poisoning and exposure to the elements.

Because most US troops are not taught how to manage when cut off from the supply train for prolonged periods. When they are that training is typically short term survival to be used while returning to the main body of US forces.
They're not really trained or equipped to handle long term survival with limited (if any) access to the supply infrastructure they're used to.

Meaning you're going to have US troops drinking dirty water when their supply of clean water and water cleaning consumables are used up.
Food will be a similar story once they start scavenging for whatever they can find in the ruins of a nation that has been in a consistent state of famine for decades. Cannibalism will probably feature heavily. You'll most likely have gangs of US troops hunting down the locals for something to eat, only cementing the image of the monstrous yankee devil in the eyes of the norks.
If the USA is stupid enough to attack in winter or the autumn then we can expect a lot of US troop losses to the weather as mountainous North Korea can get pretty cold in winter and autumns in Korea are pleasant but extremely short. While they'll manage just fine initially they'll find it increasingly difficult as the general supply cutoff continues and fuel becomes more scarce.

The USA's only means to reliably get supplies to its forces will be via airdrop. But said airdrops will most likely have to come from outside Korea as South Korean refugees will progressively swarm towards air and naval ports looking for supplies or a way out of the country.
As things drag on though said airdrops will become harder to coordinate with US troops inside North Korea. Batteries and fuel supplies will run out or equipment abandoned when supplies don't come in time or are captured by remaining North Korean forces and/or civilians.

In my day we called them, "policing actions."

If the U.S., with all the money we spend on defense, would lose to a shitty, backwards rice nation that can barely feed it's own people half the time (at least, that's the horseshit we're being fed by ZOG) then we need to fire fucking everybody in charge and start all over again.

You can't win a war with an airforce.

It's just a factor that makes your enemy weaker, but you still have to confront him on the ground to actually win.

LOL, you're a caricature.

Why don't you go back and whore yourself for some reddit gold? Piece of shit not even 10 years of lurking will make you a Holla Forumsack

yeah and the majority of soldiers in wwi and ii had never done anything remotely combat related, until they did
go eat more crayons, dumb dumb dog. its a pointless consideration. also the general isnt worried about losing a war against the norks because everyone knows that would never happen. hes trying to drum up more funding and troop numbers to make his own role more important

huh

Fun fact: Despite propaganda in US schools, they didn't capitulate because of that.

You've got to be fucking trolling me, there's no way anyone with half a brain would say something as retarded as
because that's literally the single worst particle retardant material.

it was a large factor of it, nigger. they were losing the war on all fronts and the nukes expedited their surrender

What you don't seem to realize at this point is that desipte "losing" so many "wars", America has achieved every large scale military goal it set out to accomplish since Korea, which it still pretty obviously​ won before it basically decided to stop fighting. America wasn't trying to win Vietnam or it could have used the most obvious tactics. These wars clearly weren't started for the reasons their government wants you to believe and the metric for success is therefore very different than you're using, which to be fair is the metric they want you to use. Do you think we fought against Germany in WWII because our government thought it was moral? Do you think they can afford to care? Or when war is necessary to sell war machines, just maybe the interests of Americans don't always align with the interests of those that govern them. how effectively do you think they "help rebuild" other people's ​countries using tax money?

American lives lost are not heavy investments to those in the power structure. Sometimes it seems worth losing a little war just as a sign of strength, just to make a statement.

...

...

Going yet further.

All this of course implies China is sat back with popcorn (or eggs boiling in the urine of virgin preteen boys) and laughing at the whole mess.
They won't be, they'll be making sure the USA feels every bit of the pain and acting to ensure their efforts to alleviate said pain don't have the intended effect.

The USA will be focusing its efforts on securing North Korea and preparing for the inevitable open war with China. They'll have little time or resources for relief efforts in South Korea and considering the scale of the clusterfuck any effort they do spare will not amount to much.
Meanwhile China will be doing everything it can to get the South Korean refugees on its side or at least turn them against the USA. Every refugee camp and South Korean settlement will have agitators pushing for conflict with the USA and helping distribute Chinese aid to those who display hostility towards the USA.
Then come the weapons.

Now the USA has a long history of supplying arms to various groups. We all know they love providing them to Religion of Cuck™ic militias they're fighting. Because of this the USA has a reluctance to provide certain kinds of weaponry such as man portable anti-aircraft weapons.
China won't have this reluctance. They also have the manufacturing capacity to throw these things around like confetti.
This will only make resupply via air more difficult for the USA as US held airfields in South Korea will quickly be staked out by anti-US South Korean militias equipped with anti-air weapons. Which along with general armed hostility from the South Korean population under Chinese direction will only push stressed troop resources more and make the supply situation even worse. It will also fuck up the USAs efforts to rebuild infrastructure they need to move troops, supplies and equipment.

Imagine Afghanistan without reliable air dominance and an enemy that is not reliant on the USA for its weapons.
That is what Korea will be.

Add to that the fact that Kimchiniggers are good fighters (which Afghans aren't) and that that particular geography is perfect for guerilla warfare (even better than Afghanistan).

Sure, never said airforce can't be a factor, just saying it can't alone force a surrender. Japan was basically surrounded at that point, with USA planning a massive ground invasion, and their emperor already drafting a surrender letter. Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't of huge importance, but the fact the emperor lost the will for war plus the (bluff) of skies filled with bombers carrying nukes, convinced them to end it.

I don't see how the same situation applies to north Korea. You can't threaten them with ground invasion because your manpower is stretched too thin over the world. And you can't bluff them into expecting a nuclear holocaust because you are a bunch of vaginas and they know it. Ergo USA already lost the war, before it even began.

Good posts user

idk mang in land battles aircraft are the deciding factor in modern doctrine
infantry are used to locate and suppress a hostile element while you get air to drop heavy shit on them, or artillery if you're fighting a pretty much static war and defined war in tight areas which generally doesnt happen much

The Afghan is like most Arabs a competent and capable fighter.
So long as fighting is in the interests of him and his tribe and tribal conflicts don't enter in the equation.
Because otherwise he is extremely unreliable, prone to treachery, theft and desertion.
As the USA has found during its efforts to build a unified Afghan military and Afghan police force.

However the USA faces a very different people in North Korea.
You see North Korea has never been self sufficient in terms of food due to its mountainous and rocky terrain.
As such its primary exports have always been security to the South and mercenaries to China. The South fed the North and the North protected the South.
In Japan theres a few mounds full of the decomposing remnants of pickled Korean ears from Japans military adventures in Korea long ago. The overwhelming majority of said ears will be North Korean.

What this means is that the USA will be facing a people who have militarism in their blood. Who are almost all descended from a long line of North Korean soldiers and who historically are used to fighting against overwhelming odds.
Worse for the USA they're a people who embrace said lineage.

The only upsides for the USA is that the rebellious and angry Southern Koreans are primarily descended from merchants and farmers. Making them softer but a lot more vicious and greedy.
And the North Koreans have been in a state of famine for decades and are as such not up to what they could be physically, but they are used to such deprivation by this point.

The issue here is what comes after the initial military conflict.
The strategic objectives rather than battlefield ones.

...

Afghans are not Arabs and Arabs are terrible fighters. So terrible that military historians study their incompetence.

That's not the strategic objective.
The goal is to use North Korea for its land border with China in order to exert military pressure on China to try and force it to capitulate to US demands in the international arena.
Or launch a punitive military campaign when China continues to refuse US demands.

As it stands the USA presents no credible military threat to China.
It's only options are to either go completely overboard with a nuclear attack or launch an extremely costly and prolonged military campaign either via an attempted sea landing which even if successful would cripple the US military or via a land campaign from another nation bordering on China.
Problem with the last option is that they will have to cross literally all of China to hit the capitol which due to Chinas size is the USAs only real hope for securing a quick end to the war by decapitating the administrative and political leadership.

But if they have North Korea its just a quick jaunt through one urban centre to Beijing.

Riight I was thinking of the Pashtun for some reason. Got them mixed up.

Pashtuns (the dominant ethnic group in Afghanistan) aren't Arabs either.

...

Yeah I know. I derped and thought the Pashtuns were arabs.

Just because the USA has nearby nations under its thrall doesn't mean it is a military threat to another nation that happens to be nearby.
How praytell would the USA attack China as the situation currently stands?

so taking north korea as another nation in our influence will accomplish…?

naval invasion from japan
aerial invasion also
maybe loading into SK and fucking north through either north korea or laos
shit nigger its not hard

you could even into it from the west via pakistan or kazakhstan if you savescum diplomacy hard enough

o thats embarassing i meant exert pressure over an increasingly westernized vietnam and invade via land from there

Naval invasion. So a sea landing.
What you would have to pull off there is the largest amphibious invasion since WW2. It would make Operation Overlord look like a minor training exercise in terms of the required size.
Because any such invasion would be blatantly obvious months in advance as you began preparations meaning the Chinese military would be ready for you.
So you'd need to commit huge numbers to soak the inevitable heavy casualties.
And this is before you even make landfall because guess what China has lots of? Long range rockets. They fucking love them and any US invasion force will be contending with near constant long range rocket strikes.

Once you hit landfall you're facing the largest military force on the planet on their home turf in one of the two or three scenarios their entire military doctrine is built around.

During all this the landing forces will need to secure enough beachhead to set up makeshift facilities for unloading heavy armour and reinforcements.

Even if the USA pulled it off somehow the casualties and loss of war material would be catastrophic. It's unlikely the US population would be willing to continue the war after such a pyrrhic victory.
It would essentially become a national day of mourning that is how bad it would be.

Air invasion….you airdrop in all the troops and armour? No that's not feasible. Not in the slightest. My god who would come up with such a silly idea.

You go the North Korea route? Look to my earlier string of posts on what would happen in that exact scenario.

Vietnam is not feasible either. While yes you get a land border from a moderately friendly nation you're going to have to fight across the entirety of China to get to Beijing.
The USA can't take and hold all of China, nor can it take and hold a route between Vietnam and Beijing. So any forces sent that way are liable to get cut off very quickly.
This is of course without raising the issue of how Vietnam and her people would react to the prospect of playing host to huge numbers of US troops.
Especially considering said troops would be primarily located in northern Vietnam. Where people are still losing limbs to US mines and many suffering from genetic damage that has persisted across generations courtesy of US pesticide use during the Vietnam war.

Hahaha.
Same problems as Vietnam but with even more problems introduced courtesy of a less reliable transport route and a nation more inclined to mess with the USA for kicks.

Looking further at Pakistan and Kazakhstan.
Ahahaha yeah no even less feasible than I thought.
Greater distance to cover AND you gotta base your forces in Kashmir.

Wait no read the map wrong that part of Kashmir is part of India.
Hahaha its even worse looking into it. There's three mountain passes leading from Pakistan to China and only one has a developed road network.
Pakistan is officially off the table.

all youre saying here is that it would be impossible to win a conventional war against china, as best indicated by
which is completely false. china is, as it always has been, a paper tiger. despite their numerical and technological superiority they get raped by literally every nation they engage with
but lets, for argument's sake, say that yes, it would be impossible to win against china. what, exactly, would taking north korea do for us in this situation? what is your suggested strategic objective for this war? you say it sould be useful to pressure china but, if it were impossible to win a military victory against china, that wouldnt be so. if it were some other diplomatic affair, what would north korea give us that south korea and japan already dont?
youre just fapping to muh asian superiority and being a retard about it
unfuck yourself kid

The military budget is completely pointless, America itself has become (for lack of better terms) a nation of cuckolds, weaklings and sissies. Same thing happened in ther empires, take rome for example, by the time the huns arrived and triggered the great migrations, rome stil had by far the most powerfull army. The devil is always in the details, you cant have a state formed of weak-minded people with no civic virtues, welfare parasits who actively opress productive sectors of the population for political gain, ideological biases that encourage you to be tolerant to your enemies (in rome it was christianity, in america now its the mentality instilled by the subverted education system)

Yes China has a long history of getting its shit kicked but it has plenty of history of doing the kicking.
The issue here is that the USA can't win a prolonged conflict against China nor can it win a war where it can't maintain the logistical infrastructure its military relies on.

So for the USA the primary objective in a war with China is to quickly fuck the administrative and political centre of the nation.
That being Beijing.
Speed is everything here because the longer it takes the more time they have to distribute manpower. The more they can do that the more likely it is the USA will get dragged into a a prolonged conflict it can't win.

They won't get the main leaders, the top level. But thats fine they're not the target, the target is the small army of administrators and functionaries below them who are responsible for actually running the Chinese state, economy and military.
You cut them down and suddenly China becomes a headless chicken running around in circles. It'll even probably wind up splitting into multiple successors states run by whoever can marshal together the support of the troops and officials in the areas.

That's what the USA's goal is in a conflict with China.
Cut off the head and try to fracture whats left.

This is why the USA is so obsessed with taking North Korea. It gives them the shortest possible route to Beijing.

And really you don't quite understand the points being made in regards to the Norks being used to famine. It means they're more prepared to suffer before it begins to affect morale or their ability to work together.
When you're used to things being shit all the time what does it matter if they're a bit shittier? You're still a malnourished little gook but that's normal to you. Normal to a US soldier is a high calorie diet laced with additives to improve perceived taste.
Or the military heritage. Which yeah I'm guessing you're a yank, so you don't have heritage which explains why you dismiss it so readily.

I think lots of rare metals were discovered there too. Such that 90% of reserves world wide are in north korea or something like that. China currently has monopoly on them by a longshot. Typical geopolitical fun.

from
https://
qz.com/1004330/
north-korea-is-sitting-on-trillions-of-dollars-on-untapped-wealth-and-its-neighbors-want-a-piece-of-it/

I mean monopoly on current production. NK unttapped atm.

Yeah but the USA doesn't tap its own reserves of these resources.
Nor would the USA be able to actively pursue extraction of North Korean rare earths for years if not decades after the war.
This is assuming theres no war with China in the aftermath.

The USA's overall strategy on rare earths is to let China dominate the market for the forseeable future. Only tapping their own reserves if they have to or when Chinas begin to run out.
Since right now tapping them would only serve to drive down prices and promote competition in the market.

If any US generals are reading, this approach is probably your best bet. Historically, China was
For a couple thousand years.

As it stands the USAs main desire is to present a credible military threat to China.
They don't need to actually go to war with it, they just want to get out this situation they're in.

See the USA since it stopped being isolationist and focused on the Americas, has never really faced a situation where it wants to influence a nation but doesn't have any way to do so nor presents any credible military threat to said nation.
The USA tries to bribe and sleaze its way into influence and has insofar failed with China.
So the USA throws its military muscle around, screams and howls but the Chinese just laugh and go "lol fags"

The whole situation just makes no sense to them. Especially to those born and raised in the post WW2 era where US power and hegemony was seemingly on an inevitable rise.

The key word there is "seemingly". To the rest of the UN and it's patron states, USA is world police, but the Chinese say oh yeah? Prove it.

To be fair China are the only ones who could.
As it stands the USA is no threat to them in any capacity.
Militarily we've gone over in depth.

But economically the USA is reliant on cheap chinese manufacturing to the point where they essentially paid for the development of Chinas massive industrial capacity.
Industrial capacity that China can just as easily use to service other nations.
In the event the USA tried imposing sanctions they wouldn't be able to do much without hurting themselves and that's assuming the Chinese don't go "lol counter sanctions" causing the US economy to essentially crash and burn.
Not that the Chinese economy wouldn't suffer in the process but they as a manufacturer are better positioned to recover from an economic crisis like that.

From the article
Yeah the Navy is literally crashing into merchant boats

There is a big difference between normal operational readiness and fighting slant eyed Norks on the high seas. I promise you the boys will kick it into high gear for the slaying of degenerate Norks.

The problem is more the US Navy having a lot of difficulty finding good manpower and retaining it. So its the shortbus crowd getting put in essential roles.

Much like the entirety of the US military much of the manpower they draw in is subpar and the training programs this mandates tend to drive away or degrade manpower of superior quality if they're not identified early on and seperated.

This isn't a new problem for the USA. Its one they've had to contend with for a long time.
But in recent years their ability to mitigate the problem has taken some serious hits.

suppose the usa goes balls deep into china and even achieves its goals of a quick zergrush to the capital

wouldn't they face problems in every other theater, presumably the forces committed to china would be large and other nations will guess they are next after the partition of china
especially russia will start to annex regions around them to create a buffer just like in wwII
and half of the south american shitholes might go in revolution mode

if all your forces are stuck in one part of the world all the rest can't be world policed

Day by day, US just sounds like dumb cunts directed by "muh tech" rather than being on the ground, guerillas. They'll be like stationary Brits in the Revolutionary War when table turn.

Yeah this is another issue they'll face.
The overwhelming majority of US forces and resources will have to be poured into the China confrontation so they'll pretty much lose control of everything else they're pratting about with.

Its unlikely Russia will outright annex anyone but it will "encourage" its NATO neighbours to shift allegiance and put pressure on the EU to ditch the US.
Which won't be too hard due to the economic crisis the USAs conflict with China will cause.

But South America may or may not go apeshit. Mostly because the USAs made its oppression at the hands of the USA mostly self sufficient. All they have to do is educate the secret police/rebels.

The real problems for the USA will be in the middle east.
They'll lose what little control over Iraq they had and Afghanistan will revert to Taliban control pretty much overnight.

Having thought on it further.

The conflict would probably result in severe cuts to US military aid in the middle east. Especially to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Which along with Afghanistan falling to the Taliban and Iraq more openly getting chummy with Iran combined with Russia poking its great big bear penis into the region again due to the vacuum, would all probably come together in a hilarious perfect storm of fuck fucking everything.

Namely the Israelis would find themselves facing war on multiple fronts along with the Saudis.
Theres a lot of grudges and bad blood in the region.
The Saudis may find themselves finally targeted by the Religion of Cuck™ic militias they've financed for decades along with the Israelis who will suddenly find Palestine a lot more uppity and full of non-Palestinians who happen to share their interest in killing Jews.

Israel may be able to hold its own.
But Saudi Arabia will not. It's military isn't capable of fighting a meaningful conflict against anyone. Nor can it use most of the equipment it has without foreign mercenaries, who won't stick around for long once the conflict with surrounding nations starts to heat up.
The Saudi oil infrastructure will be a priority target to any potential enemies and inevitably it will be damaged to the point where it can't be used without substantial repairs.

Once that happens the Saudis and probably the USA are fucked. Since without their huge oil production capacity the Saudis won't be able to finance anything or dominate the international oil trade enough to force the use of the petroDollar.
Meaning many nations will stop trading oil in Dollars. At that point the US economy will enter a nosedive it can't recover from and the US military will be too tied up with China to bring the oil producing nations into line or alleviate the Saudis problems.

Deep state demoralization.

FAKE NEWS

Sage in a shit thread to find the digits.