North Korea

>>1154994
Because North Korea isn't as bad as westerners imagine.

It's pretty fucking bad, but not bad enough for the risk of revolting to be worth it.

>>1155001
>famines so severe that people resort to cannibalism
>1984 and beyond levels of state control and and monitoring of individual life
>literal slave labor camps

how can rebellion possibly lead to a worse situation?

The Peoples Very Happy. Comrade Kim Jung Un Is Glorious Leader And Beloved Of The Peoples.

>>1155022
North Korea has a huge army and a lot of weapons, and plans of any large-scale rebellion would not go unnoticed by the government.

>>1154994
It has the support of the generals and the military

If that support were ever to fade away, it would collapse almost immediately.

>>1155022
because in one scenario you live and in the other you die

>>1154994
Read 1984. It should answer your question.

>>1155001
It's pretty god awful, especIally compared to its Southern neighbor, which isn't exactly known for being an open society.

People live in blocks of 5 or more usually, there's little to no public transport, either you take a bike or you walk everywhere. The more rural areas have dirt roads and no plumbing, heating, or electricity and people frequently resort to living in straw huts in some areas. Your only real hope for advancement was to move to Pyongyang and hopefully get a job as a party member or working as a tour guide for an agency.

>>1155022
North Korea actually hasn't had a famine for quite some time.

>1984 and beyond levels of state control and and monitoring of individual life
We have that in many western countries too, except since we're run by businessmen it's used to market shit at us and you're in greater danger of getting fired than going to prison.

>>literal slave labor camps
They literally have those in South Korea.

>>1155074
That's not great, but it could be way worse.

Relative to African areas where witches are considered a legitimate threat and most people life to 50 North Korea is relatively okay.

>>1155081
Its still fucking shit man.

>>1154994
They believe that outside world is even worse because of US enslaving men, killing women, eating babies and so on. So in their eyes it's better to just live in huts than to risk US getting control of True Korea.

>people defending north korea
lmao is this the usual 4chan contrarianism on steroids or what

>>1155093
Aye, but shittiness alone isn't enough to cause
a revolution.

>>1155075
>shit being marketed at you is just as bad as being killed for not loving the party enough


Why are commies so delusional

>>1155103

North Korea is ranked as a medium nation on the Human Development Index, no one has defended it as such but it is simply not accurate to make it out to be an extreme example of a shit country when in fact it is pretty average.

>>1155081
It's only surviving because the U.S. and China give it food aid despite the former being its so called mortal enemy. Look at the pictures you can find online of Rural NK and tell me they're not some of the most depressing shit you've ever seen.

>>1155074
>People live in blocks of 5 or more usually, there's little to no public transport, either you take a bike or you walk everywhere. The more rural areas have dirt roads and no plumbing, heating, or electricity and people frequently resort to living in straw huts in some areas. Your only real hope for advancement was to move to Pyongyang and hopefully get a job as a party member or working as a tour guide for an agency.
This. the country is shit for any heodnist.

>>1155119
t. some pasty white boi

>>1154994
there are too many loyalists in the military.

>>1155107
It can't be called comunist country anymore. It's just a despotic monarchy. Only connection with comunism is their name.
> Peoples
> republic of
> North
> Korea

>>1155107
I wasn't saying it's as bad, maybe I didn't articulate that point very well.

What I'm saying is mass-survaillance isn't a product of North Korea being North Korea, it's a side-effect of technological advancement. We're just fortunate enough to have an elite who aren't particularly interested in people saying rude things about them.

>>1155117
m8, you can see depressing hungry people right now if you walk down the busy street of any major city.

>>1155129
They don't even pretend to be communist anymore, they've removed all references to communism from the government.

>>1155130
Not even close to the same scale. Those people have places to care for them, that offer them food, shelter, activities, things to do and programs to better themselves. North Korea has almost none of that, especially in the most desolate of areas.

>>1155130

Are you really comparing the situation in North Korea with the homeless populations in major cities?

File: slide_338023_3438818_free.jpg (185KB, 1200x850px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1200x850px

>>1155022
>>literal slave labor camps
because if they rebel not only themself but their whole family would end up in one of those

>>1155137
I wouldn't say that's true, whilst North Korea fucking sucks there's definitely some effort to alleviate the poverty.

File: 14635524546.png (374KB, 660x660px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 660x660px

>>1154994
I swear, he looks better with a beard

The ruling class is the armed forces that's why.

That fat little turd is just there as a sideshow while the generals run shit behind the scenes.

>>1155144
No, I'm just pointing out that you can use poverty to demonize any country you want (as even the North Korean government do) because it's everywhere. It's simply not an argument.

>>1155145
To be fair not even the CIA believes the stories about trans-generational concentration camps.

>>1155147
Not coming from the government that's for sure. Almost all of it is due to the work of NGO's that are limited to distributing U.S.-Chinese aid In the more neglected communities. They provide other basic services, but the red tape surrounding working as a non-for-profit in North Korea is unbelievable.

File: Kornheiser Fail Mary.png (89KB, 236x319px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 236x319px

>>1155129
>>1155131
Yet another failed communist revolution.

>mfw the only successful communist revolution ever has been Somalia

>>1155159
The Somalian state still exists, it's just claiming a country full of armed tribals that don't want them there.

>>1155155
People have to know there's a better way.

North Korea has been successful at preventing enough people from finding out that free-enterprise is superior to keep the masses from revolting.

>>1154994
Population is underfed and pretty poor. The army is well equipped. But because a very large part of the population believes or seems to believe that they're living in paradise it's very dangerous to spread rebellious thoughts, and rebellion can't even take root. I doubt that people who want to rebel dare to share those thoughts to anyone but close friends and family, if they even dare that, for fear of betrayal.

>>1155155
When the advancement of society starts to outpace itself. Bourgeois revolutions started happening because the nobility were becoming vestigial and useless compared to the power of the merchant class as society developed. However North Korea is not developed at all, the state there is just as powerful as ever and so there is no way to get rid of it from the bottom up.

>>1155155
Here's what will probably happen
>A Kim eventually comes into power that actually wants to change the country and open it up to the Weat
>His generals consisting of old hardliners decide it's time to depose him and the country splits in half, the people supporting the Kim while the military supports the hardliners.
>NK erupts into civil war
>The South uses this to its advantage, breaks the armistice, and invades NK.
Chinks do nothing because by that point they're sick of Nk's shit too. United Korea soon after.

>>1155159

Proper Communism has never been tried.

>>1155152
>To be fair not even the CIA believes the stories about trans-generational concentration camps.
I wouldn't be suprised if the trans-generational camps where a myth but can you please post a source?

>>1155181
Chinks will keep supporting NK until American troops leave South Korea.

If there's still American troops in South Korea were they to try and invade the North China would invade right back.

>>1155184
I love how communists thinks this is a good excuse.
It's just another proff that communism is a fantasy.

>>1155181
But why would he want to open the country? He is pretty much god and he can do whatever he wants, so why would he want to risk losing that?

>>1155191
>China would invade right back.
"no"

And the South doesn't even really want to reunite.

>>1155152
>It's simply not an argument.
It's the fact that, compared to its Southern neighbor, the country is clearly in a far worse state of affairs that makes it relevant and important.

It's also because of how much of a contradiction the country itself is, being its essentially a fascist dictatorship disguised with Marxist iconography that has essentially not changed one iota in the 50+ Years since the armistice. It's an international pariah because of how unbelievably backwards it is, and how it stands out even compared to its Chinese and Russian neighbors in terms of utter destitution.

>>1155199
Because he (unlikely as this would be) actually cared for his people and recognized that working with the West is the best option in the long term?

>>1155210
The argument isn't that NK is better than SK, it's whether North Korea is bad enough to warrant a revolution to the people living there.

North Korea is a shithole. But is it so terrible that it's worth risking revolution? No, there's far worse countries out there than North Korea and even they're not in danger of revolution.

>>1155199
>implying Modern China would threaten to actually start a legit war with the U.S.

The South China see shit is just trolling you know? It's basically then testing the waters to see the hat they could get away with. China has nothing to gain from invading Korea.

>>1155215
>working with the West is the best option in the long term?
Then he's an idiot and I hope he'd enjoy getting Iraqed.

>>1155206
They did it before, they'd do it again.

>>1155226
What? Iraq was a result of not working with the West and pissing off everyone in the region.

File: tumblr_inline_mpwfpbMzuc1qz4rgp.gif (493KB, 500x270px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 500x270px

>>1155215
> if he cared about his people.

>>1155231
Iraq has been working with the west for the past while now.

And it's worse than it was under Hussein.

>>1155193

It's the natural progression of mankind.

Communism is a science.

>>1155231
And oil, don't forget about oil. Without it nobody would care about what's Saddame doing.

File: IMG_5675.jpg (41KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 640x480px

>>1155242
>this post

File: tips.jpg (596KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 1000x750px

>>1155242
Tips fedora

>>1155230
> they did it before
yea, 50 years ago. World has changed m8.

File: 1463119676164.jpg (25KB, 335x268px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 335x268px

>>1155260
NOT AN ARGUMENT

>>1155269
And China is still not going to want a heavy US military presence right on their border.

Whilst things are more economically open than before the one thing that hasn't changed is as far as China goes the US is still the competition.

>>1155239
Not for the Kurds, but generally yes, that's not because of being open to the West though.
>>1155254
Oil was a big factor, but pretty much everyone wanted Saddam gone at that time anyway. He had pissed off just about every European diplomat and was surrounded by enemies that wanted him dead. No matter what your opinions are on the war itself, you can't say he played his cards well and was just minding his own business the whole time.

>>1155279
Yeah, and China and the US aren't stupid enough to let some two bit despot being deposed into a shooting war.
Especially since beijing and pyongyang aren't exactly BFF's now.

>>1155279
>And China is still not going to want a heavy US military presence right on their border.
Then they can make a deal with SK to demilitarize the zone between them.

Chinese politicians since how have been very cautious about the use of the army. They're not like Russia or America that just throws it around whenever they want. They push and prod and see what they can get away with.

>>1155279
So you think that China would go in war with US just becouse of little border friction?

>>1155297
Since Mao*

>>1155291
They're not exactly BFF's. But the nature of their relations is irrelevant, what's more worth considering is North Korea's strategic interest to the Chinese.

>Yeah, and China and the US aren't stupid enough to let some two bit despot being deposed into a shooting war.
Yes and this is why a second Korean war would never happen without competing foreign support being totally removed from the peninsula. Or if one side came out at a clear and overwhelming advantage, as of yet neither side can outgun the other so impressively to make unification worth it.

>>1155281
He was getting relly cocky, but that wouldn't be that big of a problem. He just needed to keep the oil prices low and everyone would be his friend.

>>1155298
The bigger question is if the US would go to war with China to support South Korea. Here in the west we take support for South Korea as basically self-explanatory, but in the event a second Korean war were to happen it seems like the US would be better off pulling out of South Korea than to get involved.

>>1155297
>Then they can make a deal with SK to demilitarize the zone between them.
Why would they give up their greatest bargaining chip to counter US presence in East Asia?

Sure, they could try and negotiate a deal. But you can undo a deal, having North Korea on their side is a decisive and concrete source of negotiating power. To give it up is to give more power to the US and their aligned states.

The only way I can see them doing it is if US presence in the South was negotiated away.

>>1155320
>The only way I can see them doing it is if US presence in the South was negotiated away.
That's what would probably happen if that were the case.

>>1155320
Aren't there like binding treaties tying America to SK?
Sorta like how America is stuck with defending Japan.

>>1155260
>>1155268

Once technological advancement leads to the end of scarcity then you will see, comrades.

Stop being counter-revolutionaries now or you may be the first against the wall.

Traitors to the Proletariat will not be forgiven.

No mercy to cowards and traitors.

>>1155309
He was sanctioned repeatedly by the EU, UN, Israel, Turkey and half of the Arab league. His mental state was increasingly coming into question after the whole Blood Quran incident. The only reason he survived as long as he did post war was because everyone was terrified of a Shia revolt supported by Iran (Or a Kurdish revolt in Turkey's case).

>>1155308
Well the SK has advantage in technology, logistics, naval power, air force, supplies. NK on the other hand has more men...that's all.

They are absolutely isolated and have made a religion out of servitude.
They obey due to the same reasons a 12th century christian peasant from northern europe accepts feudal servitude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGGjDfQroAc

The only people who could change the course of the nations are the militarymen, but these get kept in line because kim jong un the godhead of this dystopy executes high ranking dissenters gruesomely.
Like that one time he fed his uncle alife to rabid dogs, or that other time a defense minister got blown up in a gory mess because he fell asleep during one of the countless military parades.

>>1155348
I mean as in China vs. America which is what the situation is really all about.

Of course if foreign powers were removed from the equation SK would absolutely crush the North.

>>1155362
I'm pretty sure America can outgun the Chinese still.

>>1155362
>> 1155348
Just replace SK with US and NK with China and nothing changes.

>>1155359
>Like that one time he fed his uncle alife to rabid dogs, or that other time a defense minister got blown up in a gory mess because he fell asleep during one of the countless military parades.

Source on both of these? I find it hard to believe he's done shit this outrageous in only 4 years of being Chairman.

>>1155366
>>1155376
In a land-war right beside China the US would be fucked.

>>1155382
Realistically, both sides would get utterly rekt and come out to a bitter stalemate, with China just barely edging out if it uses all its manpower in one go.

>>1154994
>unopposed
kek

>>1155382
The chinese would be equally as fucked.

>>1155382
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
In a conventional war nobody could defeat US. And don't forget that US wouldn't be alone, EU, Japan and NATO would be on US side.

>>1155126
found the hedonist

File: Children_In_iraq-iran_war4.jpg (68KB, 773x534px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 773x534px

>>1155362
>SK would absolutely crush the North.

I dont think so.
The norks are starved, desperate and dont value the lifes of their soldiers much, while the southkoreans have superiour technology and firepower it would be devastating for their morale to shoot human waves relentlessy, while the north koreans will exploit the psychological horror of this brotherwar ruthlessy.
Espeacially childsoldiers can make fanatical opponents.

Id probably would be a bit like the Iran-Iraq war.
Saddam was prepped up by the americans and had (for middle eastern standarts) a great army absolutely superiour to the iranian forces.
The Iranians however used human wave tactics and used children squads (3boys one antitank-mine) to bust horrendous amounts of saddams tanks.

I've read here that, outside of its major cities, South Korea is pretty damn bad as well re: poverty in rural areas.

>>1155380
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/03/22156917-kim-jong-uns-executed-uncle-was-eaten-alive-by-120-hungry-dogs-report

The chinese told it the west.

>>1155411
>brotherwar
literally only old people still remember a united korea, I doubt most young SKers give a shit.

>>1155403
You are posting on 4chan, you are a hedonist too.
Get off the computer and go work, idle hands are the devil.

>>1155419
Well, you need to dehumanize your enemy in order to shoot large amounts of him.
That gets harder if he looks exactly like you and speaks the same language.
Maybe thats why they are placing robot sentries at their border.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZF-qXpEz8U

I didnt thought about the airforce though.
Its not believable that the norks could do much in the air.

>>1155447
>That gets harder if he looks exactly like you and speaks the same language.
doesn't seem to have stopped all the civil wars.

>>1155400
If they couldn't beat China in the first corean war, there's no way in hell they could do it now when China has gotten astronomically more powerful.

>>1155411
They wouldn't even get close to SK. SK air force and artillery would destroy all railroad and their naval forces would make D day styled invasion near NK capital. Or they would jyst assasinate Kim.

>>1155411
>the needless cruelty = STRONK meme
the only reason you believe this is you can't imagine anyone would govern with methods that are literally worse in every way.

it's not like people break down and give up defending their homeland if it happens they have to see some shit doing that. meanwhile north will coup itself at the first sign of instability.

>>1155458
>they couldn't beat China in the first corean war, there's no way in hell they could do it now when China has gotten astronomically more powerful
literally what
they're fucking small potatos compared to the US, even if they have "improved".

>>1155459
They got more powerful but less united. They couldn't use the same tactics as they did in 50s. Peole would dissegre with helping NK and they would protest against it.

>>1155466
Are you implying the weren't potatoes in the Korean war? They were barely better equipped than rebels yet still fucked the western counter-invasion anyway.

There are simply too many Chinese people for the US to even come close to beating them. Especially since now they're much better trained and equipped than they were like 60 years ago by an order of magnitude.

>>1155308
>Second Korean War
The "First" Korean War isn't over though Anon. So how can there be a second?

>>1155518
> lol it's just a stalemate haha read a book anon lmao get rekt m9
kek

>>1155490
And there's far too many Americans for the Chinese to ever beat but lets be real, it wasn't the "quality" or "quantity" of Chinese soldiers that led to the stalemate of the Korean War, but rather fear that pushing too far would lead to a confrontation with the Soviets, and maybe nuclear conflict with the PRC.

>>1155458
What the fuck are you talking about Anon? China was getting wrecked by the US especially since they can't get into logistics, had a ceasefire never happened in the Korean War, China would never be able to get it's affairs in order and create defenses it needed to continue fighting.

Manpower doesn't mean shit if you do not have the morale, technology, logistics, ability to produce items and continue fighting, and overall plan.

tl;dr: China may have more men, but the US has better men.

>>1155532
The Soviets did get involved in the Korean war and the western powers pushed hard. It's not like the Vietnam war where they had their hands tied to avoid escalating the conflict, with the Korean war the only way to escalate it was to bring out nukes.

It's simply an inherent problem with fighting an enemy infinitely more numerous than yourself in more or less their home turf, you would get raped. Likewise the Chinese would get annihilated if they tried to invade say Canada.

>>1155527
Who are you quoting? That post you are replying to is pretty accurate.

>>1155549
The Chinese have invaded Canada though

>>1155532
Soviets hated PRC and wouldn't helped them in war. Stalemate happened because both sides realised that the war was going nowhere.

>>1155545
Are you implying that these days the Chinese are lacking for morale, technology, logistics and production?

Because that's a flagrant lie.

>>1155555
Five 5's.

>>1155564
>Technology, Morale, and Logisitics
Compared to the US yes. US beats China in that.

>Production
Debatable. US can pick itself up with large scale production if it goes total war with a country.

>>1155558
They invaded Alaska, but nuclear war started before they could have advance

>>1155466

The CCCP could march on the White House any time they wanted.

The Chinese are simply more civilized than the barbarian Americans.

I heard that 50% of Americans believe the Universe was created 6000 years ago by their war god.

>>1155576
Technology I can see, the US is basically the universal upper-limit for quality military technology. This is not to say the Chinese technology is bad however.

>Morale
I highly doubt this one however. It's not possible to quantify morale but in China things like Vietnam draft-dodgers simply do not happen nor are they even allowed to happen.

>Logistics
This one is simply untrue, China would be fighting right in their own back garden. The US on the other hand has to support the war from the other side of the specific. Even given how powerful US presence is in the East and how good their navy is the US would be operating at an extreme disadvantage logistically compared to the Chinese.

>>1155555
The whole "it's just a stalemate bro!" meme is just annoying. If you go by "no peacy trety, no peace" logic, then Japan and Russia are still at war.

>>1155592
*of the Pacific

I'm a retard.

>>1155581
And I heard that most of Chinese people belive that China is comunist country.
Nice bait by the way.

>>1155592
>It's not possible to quantify morale but in China things like Vietnam draft-dodgers simply do not happen nor are they even allowed to happen.
>comparing Vietnam-era US military to the current day US military
This is stupid.
We don't have the draft anymore, and you can bet there would be a LOT more support behind American troops this time around.
I mean, soldier worship in America is a huge thing.

>>1155622
>and you can bet there would be a LOT more support behind American troops this time around.
1. There was never a time when people supported US soldiers more than immediately after WW2, and even then people were incredibly critical of US military actions
2. Soldier worship in China is an even bigger thing, whilst China is quite possibly the least Imperialist world power they still militartistic as fuck.

>>1155592
>Chinese technology is bad however.
This is true. Chinese technology isn't bad, but it's not very good either.

>Morale
>I highly doubt this one.
Anon, this can go in two ways.

If China is the aggressor against the US; Morale and the will to fight by the US citizens and military will beyond high. Because the US is always in a blood for the blood god mode, and will rape anything to satisfy it if it's the one attacked.

If US is the aggressor and gets involved without a true reason. Morale will mostly be normal, meh, and unlikable levels. It can be said the same for China though they will be losing a lot of business and their economy will go through a storm, US will be effected, but not like China.

>Logistics
>Untrue
China has always had shit logistics, from the Korean War to their little thing in Vietnam. They even had the upper hand at those times, Korea they got pushed by the US after their initial steam worn out, and needed a ceasefire to regroup and get their affairs in order.

Not too mention the US is capable of handling it's supplies and management with ease, best part unlike China the US and it's supplies will not be under constant danger. A battle with China in it's own yard would be one of attrition rather than conquest, something China would have a far easier time losing.

>>1154994
Typical tyrannical oppression combined with 21st century technology (which the government does have) make it extremely easy to control the population.

>>1155634
>Soldier worship in China is an even bigger thing,
Do soldiers in China get discounst, free food, clothing, and other benefits from business? Do they get thanked on the street by random pedestrians, and have drinks bought for them at bars? Its really hard to understate just how much the American public adores soldiers.
Vietnam changed so much of the nations relationship with its military, unless you've actually been in the US for a while, its hard to imagine.

>>1155081
Those Africans have the freedom and control of their own destiny though and even the chance to migrate to Europe.

>>1155634
>There was never a time when people supported US soldiers more than immediately after WW2.

This is a lie. US Citizens were ready for the Iraq War and were for it, Korean War had some support when it started.

>Even then people were incredibly critical of the US military actions.
Nice job adding that to the end. People will always be critical about US military actions because it's war, it affects them, nobody is going to be happy.

>Soldier worship in China is an even bigger thing.
No shit. Nationalism does that.

>China is quite possibly the least imperialist world power.
You lost me mate. China is trying to force it's influence in Asia like a mother fucker, but is getting pushed back by the US.

>>1155651
And don't forget about their neocolonialism in Africa.

>>1155641
They have some 21st century tech in capital city but outside of there it's closer to 19th century.

>>1155655
>>1155651
Name two wars involving China that didn't happen right beside them.

>>1155662
That's bullshit, the government has it, not the general population.

>>1155067
>middle school literature

>>1155677
That's what I meant.

>>1155681
That's why I recommend it. What's your recommendation?

>>1155668
Northern Maili War
Mongol Invasion of Java

>>1155668
What's your point? Imperialism fighting wars far away but about expanding your influence. China didn't conquer other countries because they had enough land but they forced other nations to recognise China as best and richest nation in world. They stoped this only because they turn in fat and lazy blob and their empire was taken part by part by European powers.

>>1155721
Imperialism isn't about*

File: Ir905bR.gif (595KB, 460x600px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 460x600px

>>1155333
>Muh postscarcity
>Muh sci fi

File: doc.png (1MB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x600px

>>1154994
They have the perfect ration of Inner Party to Outer Party to Proles that makes the oligarchy powerful enough to crush rebellion, but content enough to avoid internal struggle

I've long thought we should bomb north Korea with culture. Literally fly over and drop anti-totalitarian literature and first-world entertainment on their doorsteps, in their language, on a daily basis, until their citizens are furious at everything.

>>1154994
>Implying North Korea is not the optimal socialist state that the others only dreamed to become

>>1155279
It's not the fucking 1950's, there's a reason China is cozying up to South Korea.

>>1155638
You have a really warped view of how Americans are, we're not mythical badasses and numerous wars across the globe have shown that Americans are a) emotionally weaker than their opponents on average and b) are over-reliant on having numerical/logistical superiority to get anything done.

There's a reason that German, Russian, Vietnamese, Chinese soldiers etc. have always held a dismal view of American soldiering. Even our greatest allies the Israelis poke fun at our infantry skills.

>>1157915
This omg. Having actually been to Korea, you can notice the gigantic amount of Chinese tourists there (it's the most visited country by Chinese besides Thailand), they are building the world's largest Chinatown outside Seoul, they invited President Park to their WW2 victory parade but not fatty kim, and most Chinese chicks try to look Korean nowadays. And the ROK military is returning Chinese war dead in a very ceremonial way. Plus they hate Japan together. China and SK get along extremely well and I'm sure if Kim gets a little crazier, China will finally drop him themselves and turn over NK to Seoul in exchange for kicking out the US bases (which will have no reason to exist anymore and are already not too popular), and some of those sweet sweet minerals NK is sitting on. Then United Korea will become more of a Chinese ally than not, especially when we're talking about cooperation against Japan.

>>1157818
This. The party has literally brainwashed almost the entire population to the point that they have become a religious-like authority, and the rulers can live like kings even if the plebs are literally starving, and they've managed to keep it up all the way to the present while the other half of the country started off even worse and yet has become one of the richest and most developed countries on Earth. Other commies must be jelly af when they look up at NK from hell.

>>1157976
>German, Russian, Vietnamese, Chinese soldiers etc. have always held a dismal view of American soldiering
This is bullshit.

>>Americans are emotionally weaker than their opponents on average
This is also bullshit.

>>1155022
Because it's not THAT bad.

Just really bad.

>>1155400
Nigga the exact same forces fought there last time and didn't defeat China.

>>1157976
>There's a reason that German, Russian, Vietnamese, Chinese soldiers etc. have always held a dismal view of American soldiering. Even our greatest allies the Israelis poke fun at our infantry skills.
What the fuck am I reading?
Are you retarded?

File: image.jpg (144KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 640x1136px

>>1155466

File: 0053_defense-comparison-crop.gif (22KB, 675x345px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 675x345px

>>1158570
two can play at the chart waving game

>>1158057
Well if it makes you feel any better, we should be happy that our military places a lot of emphasis on getting the job done as safely as possible. In the event of a war with another country, you're better off in the US Army than another army in the world.

We take care of our own, even if means we'll bomb a town that has a single sniper in it rather than just assaulting it.

>>1155532
And Russia wouldn't back China now if things went bad?

NATO doesn't apply in the Pacific. Russia could go full force out there without having to face anyone but America and maybe Japan.

>>1155545
The PLA is the second strongest military in the world by a long shot in 2016.

You seem to have not been paying attention to what's been happening the last 30 years in China.

>>1158582
>And Russia wouldn't back China now if things went bad?
lmao, if there's one nation China dislikes more than the US and Japan, its the Russkies

>>1158590
And who exactly is the first strongest military power in the world again?

>>1155576
You seem to forget that America is half a world away from NK, while China is literally it's border.

America can have amazing logistics, it won't help the 3 weeks China has before the first California-based ships arrive.

>>1155622
Tbh, the US military is literally starving for soldiers right now.

>>1158603
You seem to have forgotten the fact that the US has bases in Japan and Korea and Hawaii.

>>1158569
No, I've just read enough history to know that we're not as good at war as the average bumfuck Cletus thinks. In fact, compared to actual military powers such as Napoleonic France or Bismarckian Prussia, we fucking suck ass.

Americans are some the most coddled people on the planet but the desire to be seen as strong and disciplined totally fucks with the mentality of the average American who can't seem to reconcile reality with fantasy. It's like the meme where Jorge wants to be hardcore but his mom won't let him. We want to be hardcore but our upbringings and values won't let us.

>>1158613
You should probably read more up to date literature on the US army as compared to other modern forces,

>>1155642
>Do soldiers in China get discounst, free food, clothing, and other benefits from business? Do they get thanked on the street by random pedestrians, and have drinks bought for them at bars? Its really hard to understate just how much the American public adores soldiers.

Lmao hello Southerner.

My northern city kicked the US military bases out and bans recruitment.

Soldier worship is a meme confined to the hick South.

>>1155651
>You lost me mate. China is trying to force it's influence in Asia like a mother fucker, but is getting pushed back by the US.

Ummm how many wars is China in? How many people have died in conflicts between China and other nations recently? Is China involved in countries half the world away from it?

>>1158613
>In fact, compared to actual military powers such as Napoleonic France or Bismarckian Prussia, we fucking suck ass.
lmao, how do you tards manage to breath

>>1155075
never thought I'd see a NK shill.

>>1158615
What up to date literature? Literature about how we utterly failed in Iraq and Afghanistan and tore the Middle East apart in a bid to assert American dominance in the 21st century?

People seem to think that war is just tactical engagement after tactical engagement with no regards to the bigger picture.

>>1155149
His wife's not even in that picture though.

>>1155721
>Imperialism isn't about fighting wars far away but about expanding your influence

No. Imperialism is expanding ones influence in places it doesn't have much influence.
Britian in India was imperialism.
America in Panama was not.

>>1158639
>say American soldiers are shit
>then say that all the successful battles against insurgents don't count because its not "the bigger picture"
And yes, compared to other nations we are indeed very good at winning battles.
You seem to have forgotten that Afghanistan and Iraq was a multinational deal.

>>1158017
That's the Chinese endgame.

Strike a deal with NK where China and SK retake NK together, but SK must make America remove its bases.

Then again, NK and Fatty 3 is kissing up to China now.

>>1158057
They held a dismal view.

And were shown how wrong they are.

>>1158578
You realize a gun in China doesn't cost as much as a gun in America?

>>1158660
To be fair, fighting untrained sub-80 IQ insurgents is hardly an indicator of combat efficiency. You could round a bunch of drunk Irishmen to fight some durka durkas and you'd probably get the same results.

File: USN_ships.jpg (3MB, 9996x6664px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 9996x6664px

>>1158680
Please post the present day Chinese navy in comparison.

>>1158685
Desert Storm was pretty fucking successful too, and Saddam's forces weren't exactly dirtfarmers with an AK and a grudge.

>>1158591
Hahahahahaha that's why Sino-Russian border posts are literally unguarded.

There's thousands of Weibo pictures of scarecrows holding welcome signs in the place of guards on the border.

Sino-Russian relations have never been better.

Also, Chinese hate Japanese, then Americans, and then Flips in descending order.

>>1158597
Yes but in 1950 China was 5th or 6th.

They literally relied on the Soviets for aircraft, pilots, and logistics.

File: USAF.png (3MB, 3780x2672px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3780x2672px

>>1158692

>>1158677
>Germans

Germans were impressed by American artillery but generally unimpressed by American infantry tactics. But this is due to WWII-era US Army doctrine of just shitting out replacements with no regards to unit cohesion. German commanders routinely took advantage of US complacency and refusal to press attacks. Otto Carius, renowned Panzer commander, had a really dismal view of American troops.

>We were used to an opponent the stature of the Russians; we were amazed at the contrast. During the war, I have never saw soldiers disperse head over heels even though virtually nothing was happening.
>Five Russians were more dangerous than Thirty Americans. We already noticed that in our few days in the western front.
>Again the pace of the war surprised me, the Russians would never have let us have so much time! The Americans took so long to close the pocket, especially given that nobody around wanted to fight anymore. A well organized German corps could have closed the pocket in a week.

>Russian
>Vietnam
>China

Three countries the US never beat.

File: USAF_2.png (2MB, 3780x2672px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3780x2672px

>>1158721
This isn't even our final form.

The PRC is 100 years too early to face us.

>>1158612
Yes. There's one CBG and 4 subs in Japan. And 2 subs in Guam. And 3 subs and 5 destroyers and 1 cruiser in Hawaii.

That's not enough force compared to China's 42 destroyers, carrier, 65 subs, and 70 frigates.

It would be 2-3 weeks before America could mount a naval attack on China or NK.

File: 1463333167099.jpg (34KB, 461x439px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 461x439px

>>1158722
>mfw the Americans consistently took less casualties than the Germans, while advancing into heavily fortified defensive positions most of the way

>>1158692
Post the present day US army, the thing that matters in a ground war in Korea.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Navy

Also, hello /k/

Only /k/ manchildren get so triggered they start posting pictures like a dick size contest.

>>1158722
not too sure I want to hear about criticisms of troops from a nation that would keep its aces in the air rather than grounding them to train pilots, and were literally using old people and children as troops desu

>>1158700
Then again, we only fought in Kuwait.

>>1158752
You get shit on so hard in /k/ that you resort to pulling your bullshit here.

>>1158737
>after the Russians had destroyed all the Germans elite soldiers and military equipment

>>1158737
Some historians peg the average German soldier as being ~20-30% more combat effective than the average American or British soldier. Germans weren't super soldiers as Wehraboos believe, but they were noticeably better trained and effective than their counterparts.

Note that I was talking about infantry mostly. The reality is that most casualties in war are not inflicted by men, but machines. Artillery, air power, and armor ruled the day. If you had enough of these things, tactics and discipline don't matter worth a damn.

Also of note is that German defensive doctrine revolved largely around counter-attacking as quickly as possible. Attacking was the Wehrmacht's biggest strength. Even on the attack with an inexperienced army of young kids and old men, the Germans still inflicted a ridiculous amount of casualties on the Americans during the Ardennes Offensive.

>>1158760
Hahahaha I found the armchair general!

You act like America could even put half of its navy or airforce near China.

Meanwhile China puts all of its forces near China.

Even if China's navy is 75% of America's, it still would outnumber America's forces in the Pacific by a large margin.

>>1155145
Jesus, SeaWorld has gotten dark.

File: Any thread mentioning Ukraine.png (153KB, 737x540px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 737x540px

>>1158767


>>1158771
>marshall all of your forces because we offensive again
>operational plans literally require you to take supply depots and continue advancing on stolen enemy supplies because there's no way your own logistics will support a counter-attack
>all of this while the Reds are steamrolling towards Berlin

The Battle of the Bulge is a pretty good example of why Germany got raped.

Still, I get your point.

>>1155166
Just like America.

>>1155181
>>A Kim eventually comes into power that actually wants to change the country and open it up to the Weat
The current Kim will last atleast half a century longer though.

>>1158722
You realize they're mostly spewing bravado right? These are the same people that claimed a Tiger was more cost effective than a Sherman when battle statistics showed otherwise.

>>1158782
Wew, pot calling a kettle black I see.

>>1158637
They're surprisingly common, and almost always base their views on communist conspiracy theories. Everything bad you hear is imperialist propaganda apparently.

>>1154994
He kills people pretty quickly. I think he kills them before it really even turns into a political disagreement.

There is also as far as civilians against him (malitias) there is one I know of but, for the most part news doesn't come out of korea so I don't think we would hear about it.

>>1158620
proofs

>>1154994
I've watched about 5 different documentaries of people that traveled to north korea. It is like a dog and pony show. Everything they let you see is just a people acting out a normal life. They put you in restaraunts where the rest of the customers are actors. They let you see farms but all the cows are made of plastic and they don't let you get close.

>>1158771
I was looking for information to support or disport these claims.

I just came across the facts that knives are used in more murders than guns globally (annual), and that you are more than twice likely to become a victim of knife violence in the UK than you are gun violence in America.

>>1158807
I'm not criticizing him for being one. I simply know the post style.

>>1158938
Remember 1970-1980?

Most boomers do.

>>1159000
please enlighten me.

>>1155181
China will never support Korean reunification after the Vietnamese reunification fucking with China.

>>1158933
Anti-gommie militia in NK? Please do tell more.

>>1159118
Vietnam has always hated China, but Korea was traditionally super friendly (rather submissive even) towards China.

>>1159015
There's a lot of anti-military sentiment among vietnam era Americans.

Meanwhile a lot of milennial Americans dislike the military for the War on Terror. Including me.

Check the polls.

>>1159118
I wouldn't think that. Vietnam is not China.

Also, China stopped helping Vietnam after 1966. There was a huge Sino-Soviet split that year and a couple border wars with the Soviets.

Also, Vietnam was a Soviet puppet state 1970-1985.

So China preferred that America and Vietnam bleed dry. That's why China actually became pro-America anti-Soviet 1977-1990.

>>1159251
Vietnam is not Korea*

File: 29471982.png (20KB, 448x401px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 448x401px

>>1158938
>>1159242
>he thinks his particular group of edgy faggots represents the US as a whole

This is incidentally one reason why everyone hates the northeast.

>>1159256
28 percent is significant.

File: revolution.png (5KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 480x360px

>>1154994

>>1155051

The question is WHY exactly. Why are they so loyal? There could be a military coup d'état.

>>1159288
It's less than literally any other institution in the US.

It's less than one tenth of the people who distrust congress, and less than half of the people who distrust the Supreme Court.

Even organized religion comes off worse.

You may have to accept that your views are extremely unpopular in most avenues of American society, both blue state society and red state society.

>>1159295
The people running it live like nobles.

All the generals got Jaguars and get invited to banquets and shit where the humanitarian aid money gets spent on Hennessy and caviar.

>>1159298
No. 28 percent is a significant group of Americans.

Also, comparing the trust in the Congress with that of the military is absurd. The trust in the military would naturally be higher because the blame for their failures always goes to the government in America.

So no. My view is not extremely unpopular.

Look at the polls of "would you be willing to fight for your country?"

>>1159307
Brah, in US politics, 74% is an overwhelming, crushing majority.

Evolution doesn't have that.

>The trust in the military would naturally be higher

So you concede defeat. Excellent.

>because the blame for their failures always goes to the government in America.

So you admit that almost nobody in the US hates their military.

And it makes sense, they beat the ever-loving shit out of whatever is put in front of it.

>>1159288
But it certainly isn't a fucking majority like you insinuated.

>>1159301

This. Kim Jong-il wasn't buying $750,000 worth of Hennessy every year just for himself. It's why luxury goods are such a major focus of the sanctions against the country.

File: big.png (374KB, 599x598px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 599x598px

Kim is the most feminine fucker ever, he literally looks like a fat Asian woman.

>>1159319
>Brah, in US politics, 74% is an overwhelming, crushing majority.

That doesn't make it an "extremely unpopular view."

Extremely unpopular is legalization of pedophilia.

File: 1460782931092.jpg (27KB, 557x711px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 557x711px

>>1159370
>Asians
>masculine

>>1159319
>>because the blame for their failures always goes to the government in America.
>So you admit that almost nobody in the US hates their military.

No. Where did I say that?

I am saying that much of the real dislike of the military is hidden by it being subordinate to our politicians.

Therefore the poll is biased.

>>1159382
>tfw feminine boys are prized in Asia

feels good mang

>>1159380
You're right, its merely unpopular.

>>1159326
>it isn't a majority like you insinuated

Where did I?

>>1159382
Watch war of the three kingdoms.

>>1159387
>Most boomers do.
>There's a lot of anti-military sentiment among vietnam era Americans.

>Meanwhile a lot of milennial Americans dislike the military for the War on Terror. Including me.

>>1159389
there aren't many asians like that anymore, they are very insecure, take a look at this
reddit.com/r/asianmasculinity

>>1159380
>>1159383
I think you're moving the goal posts because you got BTFO like a faggot.

Let's put it this way.

If "the military is really cool" was a political party instead of an opinion, it'd dominate both houses of congress almost completely.

Two thirds of congress is enough to pass a constitutional amendment, and I bet the "the US military is good" faction would dominate like 90% of congressional districts.

>>1159390
That doesn't indicate majority stupid fuck.

>>1159398
>reddit is representative of reality

Might as well link me /a/.

>>1159459
face it duderino, you said something stupid and got proven wrong.

>>1159399
>you're moving the goalposts

Uhh, I've been saying the same thing the whole time.

You're the one who admitted your mistake here>>1159386

>>1159464
Point out where.

>>1159471
I did.

>>1159468
You're replying to more than one person, you know.

>>1159242
Uh...

I've met many Americans and there's only a select few of them that hate the military enough to actively poison the well with their hate and shitposting when the topic is mentioned.

Most of them hate the politicians that push for war, yes, but respect veterans and soldiers enough.

Those few who hate it are also massive shitlords to begin with, but correlation is not causation.

>>1159298

What the fuck is that poll, and its methodologies.

>>1159475
You literally did not. I've made only one claim so far.

Two if you count my response to your bait about "extremely unpopular."

>>1159481
You don't have to hate to dislike.

>>1159491
It's literally a biased poll.

>>1159480
Okay?

>>1159502
>Most
>Boomers
>do
In the english language, "most" is usually meant to infer that the there is a majority in something.

>>>/pol/
How has no one mentioned that this is not a /his/ topic?

>>1159502
>biased poll
I don't see you backing up your claim that most americans dislike the military broham

>tfw there are people who think China can defeat the US militarily.
>tfw there are people who actually think the US military is weak.
I need a seat.

>>1159491
Gallup.

They asked people to rate their feelings towards an institution from a series of categories.

That's the rate of people who have positive feelings.

>>1159509
Yes and guess what "majority of Americans" means.

>>1159518
It doesn't. And where did I make this claim?

>>1159534
Are you ESL?

File: 1426224154398.jpg (12KB, 199x282px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 199x282px

>>1159534
>>1158620
>>1158620
>>1158620
>>1159000
>>1159000
>>1159000
>>1159242
>>1159242
>>1159242

>I'm not an edgy, tryhard faggot who got called the fuck out
>I'm just misunderstood

>>1159528
The problem with this poll is that some organizations are subordinate to others. Therefore the average joe assumes the commanding organization deserves the blame.

Therefore the different choices are not mutually exclusive.

Congress and the Supreme Court are not mutually exclusive. Neither is the executive branch and the military.

When choices in polls have this exclusivity problem, biases emerge.

I can frame a poll and its questions using Gallup's methodology. This throws some parts of the poll into question.

>>1159542
I can just tell that this faggot is going to obfuscate and deny previous claims and generally act like a jackass for the rest of the thread.

>>1159523
I think China would defeat America in China or North Korea.

>>1159543
>I'm not wrong about the opinions people have
>people just have the wrong opinions

>>1158620
>>1158620
>>1158620
>>1159242
>>1159242
>>1159242

I think that you should cut your losses here, and accept that not all of your gut feelings about American society are compatible with the factual evidence.

>>1159541
This is the claim made by me

>Most boomers do.
>There's a lot of anti-military sentiment among vietnam era Americans.
>Meanwhile a lot of milennial Americans dislike the military for the War on Terror. Including me.

No where does this indicate or mean "majority of Americans."

Are you illiterate?

>>1159542
(You)

>>1159546
I think what you think is wrong.

>>1159551
Polls are not factual evidence.

Also, why are you quoting other anons?

>>1159554
What happened last time?

Do you actually think China is weaker relative to us than it was then?

File: 1456934958814.jpg (714KB, 1706x2560px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 1706x2560px

>>1159555
>scientific methods to determine public opinion aren't factual evidence about opinions

Frankly, at this point I'm just here to see how many nonsense points you can make.

>>1159563
What happened last time was a stalemate.
No one won, or lost.

I predict that in the extremely unlikely event of a shooting war between the PRCR and the US, it would be a draw.

>>1159566
>scientific methods
>polls

Anon I...

>>1159555
>Polls are not factual evidence.
Jesus H Christ, just fuck off already.

>>1159563
Oddly enough, yes.

In the early 50s, there was no such thing as precision bombing, and just about every piece of equipment the PLA and USSR fielded in the conflict was about as good as the American equivalents.

The really dramatic growth in US military power happened after GPS guided PGMs became common, the US got really good at SEAD and EW, and VLO aircraft entered the inventory.

Maybe I should have put that last sentence in English instead of acronyms. Oh well.

>>1159577
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/why-michigan-polls-were-wrong_us_56dfaa6ce4b0b25c91801d95
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/02/why-were-the-iowa-polls-so-wrong/
http://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/09/28/why-public-opinion-polls-are-increasingly-inaccurate

>>1159574
>he's never taken an elementary statistics class
>he's accusing other people of being ignorant

>>1159582
>just about every piece of equipment the PLA and USSR fielded in the conflict was about as good as the American equivalents.

Lmao no

Nice bait

>>1159586
>public opinion polls
>scientific methods

I'm just going to keep pointing out how wrong this claim is.

File: tmp_19021-14580752320641208634430.jpg (92KB, 600x601px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x601px

HEY FAGGOT MOD THIS THREAD IS DISCUSSING CURRENT EVENTS TOO SINCE KIM JONG IL DIDN'T TAKE CHARGE UNTIL 22 YEARS AGO LET ALONE KIM JONG UN YOU GOING TO DELETE IT TOO?

FAGGOT

>>1154994
A few reasons:

>1. No medium to disseminate information throughout the country.
If there was a rebellion of some sort (quite possible), the NK army would have suppressed it before word got out to the next district or state. Even American & SK intelligence would not have picked up on it.
This also makes it harder for intelligence to incite a rebellion. If they did, it would be as disastrous as Bay of Pigs, at the very least.

>2. It's a society based on political ideology
Most people inside North Korea can't imagine a better society without the current system in place. If NK society (not talking about culture) was similar to SK society, a major rebellion may have been feasible. But when your society is based upon worshiping your god-ruler and his dead father & grandfather, it's in your best interests to keep worshiping them.
Let's use an analogy and be honest about Western society - no matter how much we hate advertising and corporate monopolies, it's in our best interests to keep them in place, since they are what ties society together at this point. Otherwise, we'd be hunting and foraging for food and dodging militias instead of posting on the internet from computers.

>3. It's not that bad
Remember how 'bad' Iraq was before NATO & allies invaded? Remember how 'oppressive' Gaddafi and Assad were before we gave terrorists weapons? While these countries were no paradises, Western media lies about countries that aren't friendly to Western interests. Don't take every piece of information from news media about North Korea for granted unless it's a verifiable, documented fact. It's probably bad, but not bad enough for citizens to rebel and risk their lives.
Also remember that nearly every country had famines and relatively authoritarian state structures until ~250 years ago. And also keep in mind that Asian societies emphasize discipline and loyalty exponentially more than Western societies do.

>>1158620
Bullshit, I live in the New-York New Jersey tristate area and even here soldier worship is inescapable.

>>1159589
Seriously though. The difference between a Mig-21 and an F-86 Sabre is absolutely nothing compared to the difference between a Su-35 and an F-22. A Tu-160 isn't even in the same general post code as a B-2.

This is less true for tanks nowadays, but just based on historical experience, I tend to bet on whoever has air and naval power.

Especially if they're more self sufficient in oil than the people they could easily blockade out of existence.

>>1159596
I live in Berkely.

This thread is literally eurofags hating amerifats now and claiming China would kick USA's ass in a war.
The war would just be a bitter stalemate over NK. And the morale argument is bogus. If anything, the Chinese would be bitterly fighting to the end to keep their borders safe.
However, I agree with the point that China would be fighting an uphill battle in the beggining.

>>1159599
>Seriously though. The difference between a Mig-21 and an F-86 Sabre is absolutely nothing compared

Uhh no. The F-86 wrecked the Mig-21. Even our early fighters were better than it.

>to the difference between a Su-35 and an F-22. A Tu-160 isn't even in the same general post code as a B-2.

We also only have 150 F-22's and 18 B-2's. Your comparison is flawed. We had 3,000 F-86's. They had maybe 1000. America had air superiority from pretty much the start of our push out of the Pusan perimeter.

>>1159589
USA fag here, and I can tell you that the USSR was a fucking powerhouse when it came to the military. The USSR being irrelevant meme needs to die.

Commiefags were experts when it came to heavy industry, but as soon as it came to producing for the people, shit hit the fan.

>>1159609
The point of VLO aircraft is that they have a disproportionate impact.

In the 1991 Gulf War, F-117s accounted for only like 4% of sorties, but hit most of the extremely dangerous targets.

They have the specific job of tearing IADS to pieces and opening the gates for hordes of teen series fighters, B-1s, B-52s, and whatever the rest of NATO has brought.

China would certainly be stiffer opposition than Iraq, but I wouldn't count on the ability of the Chinese to operate supply dumps or fuel depots without that shit getting bombed to pieces, or for them to be able to operate bridges across the Yalu.

In a related note, the F-35 hit IOC a few months ago. Get hype, faggot.

>>1159614
1950 Russia had shit-tier tech compared to America.

Remember that the Soviets gave the Chinese the hand-me-downs as well. Only 300-500 Mig-21's were sent and most were piloted by wary Soviet pilots unwilling to press the advantage because it wasn't their orders.

File: F35C nightop.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>1159622
Oh I am.
The F-35 is seriously impressive hardware.

>>1159702
>tfw we have thousands of them before the first PAK FA or J-20 enters service
>tfw the first VLO combat aircraft entered service in the US in 1982, and nobody else has one, 34 years later

File: F22 upskirt part two.webm (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>1159720
Feels pretty damn good.

>>1159622
China has far superior capabilities compared to 1991 Iraq.

The specialized US fighters will have an immensely tougher time against China.

Meanwhile, there simply aren't enough teen-series regular fighters to defeat China's entire air force and navy.

China gets to use all its forces. America after a few months can use 50% of its max.

>>1159720
The J-20 is about to be commisioned at the same time as the F-35A.

>>1159622
IOC was for 12 of the F-35B. Wait till the 2017 block 3B upgrades come in, if they do.

>>1159734
>The specialized US fighters will have an immensely tougher time against China.
>Meanwhile, there simply aren't enough teen-series regular fighters to defeat China's entire air force and navy.
You do know that these don't operate by themselves, right?
Its not just the USAF vs. the entuire Chinese military.

>>1159734
I dunno.

The US has more shit than we had in 1991.

You've got MALD, and JSOW making it harder than ever to turn on your radar without entering the afterlife.

And China's logistics are still fairly weak. Most of their forces are rail driven.

B-2s and Tomahawks alone will keep the trains down, and the US absolutely loves preying on supply lines and command structures.

If worst came to worst, the US has such a huge submarine advantage that we could just close the Malacca Straits with submarines and watch China disintegrate from lack of foreign oil. They import a shitload of energy.

Of course, there's always the possibility that the Chinese would break out the old canned sunshine if they started losing too badly, but they have 300 warheads to our 1000, and a much lower proportion of that is capable of reaching the continental US.

>>1159743
>J-20
>no TVC
How can they expect to rule the skies, Macross Plus style?

>>1159743
Nice 2009 memes faggot.

The JSF program has been on schedule since 2012.

Meanwhile, there isn't a single J-20 or PAK FA in anything other than the prototype stage.

>>1159758

I sunno.

China's bluewater navy is still pretty weak and their force projection is heavily linked to how much coastal defense they can muster.

Meanwhile, the Straits of Malacca, while it TECHNICALLY could be blockaded, it'll stay open because the real political powerhouse in SEA is Singapore. Because even I highly doubt the US could blockade the Straits even if Vietnam, Indonesia and the Phillipines pitched in, and Indonesia has a very iffy relationship with the US to begin with.

The Americans are still trying to pander to Singaporean interests despite having the 7th Pacific Fleet based in the Phillipines. And Singapore has close political relationships with China.

>>1159370
The Kim dynasty actually cultivates that image. See how many artistic depictions of Kim Il-Sung emphasize things like rosey cheeks etc.

It allows them to fill both a patriarchal and matriarchal role.

>>1159839
If shit really, really hit the fan, I would expect Singapore to side against China.

If not, it's the Pacific fleet, who's going to stop them?

Also, China has oil pipelines that would likely spontaneously combust in the event of a conflict.

>>1159625
Having shit tier tech doesn't matter for shit, so long the tech is in the same ballpark.
So long everything they produce is "the same but slightly worse", its really whatever so long its not significantly worse.

This is especially true of military hardware.

>>1159861

The reality is that Singapore would just profit from the conflict and offer only token help to the States, if only to look good to the US.

I'm talking the very bare minimum military help and diplomatic shit while actively profitting and exploiting both sides of the conflict. This is basically how Singapore has "fostered cooperation" within Southeast Asia, I'd assume it'd also be how they do it worldwide.

>>1154994
Very few peasant revolts have been successful in the past and the government and the army are synonyms in Best Korea, no way in hell a popular uprising can happen. Also they keep the generals happy for the most part and get rid of any and all signs of dissent.

I'm curious about what's going to happen once the last people that were actually separated by the korean war die and they really can't talk about split families anymore, those people are pretty much the only real link the two koreas have by now, I remember reading somewhere even their languages are getting slightly different.

>>1155447
It's true what they say: Life imitates TF2.

>>1160421
proof

>>1155067
Lol. Dumbass.

The government has a lot of power, enough power to ensure that rebellions are over before they can be even executed.

>>1155112
You made that up. Like actually just made that bull shite up. Lmao.

>>1155222
Name one you fucking autist

>>1159555
Would you like to explain why polls arent accurate, please?

>>1160994
Because they disagree with his views.

>>1155649
>... and even the chance to migrate to Europe

are you trolling? if so that was a good one. If not, one question: why do you think that is a good thing?

>>1157641
wouldnt that be considered an a ct of sabotage by the regime and therefore a declaration of war???

>>1158647
you what

>>1161206
There are actually treaties banning cross-border propaganda.

Private organizations will send balloons over filled with bibles and newspapers and shit.

>>1158692
>navy still didn't reactivate its battleships

vote trump for teh change.

>>1160994
It's because you can skew polls with loaded questions and cherrypicking demographics and then using math to extrapolate.

It's manipulating the data to fit the hypothesis, rather than using the data to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

>>1163078
And blaring pop music with super speakers.

File: Obama1.png (153KB, 668x576px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 668x576px

Collectivist brainwashing, ethnic supremacy, xenophobia etc etc.

File: Obama2.png (193KB, 669x655px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 669x655px

>>1163125

>>1158790
The battle of Bulge was the last chance for Germany though. They were simply ill fit to it at this point. In the essence the plan was the same as Plan Michael - and as with Plan Michael - it overwhelmed Germans after the initial success.

File: Obama3.png (81KB, 669x313px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 669x313px

>>1163126

>>1155103
This is /reddit/ the board. I don't know why so many cunts flock here with their stupid fucking opinions.

>>1155129
>Dictatorship
>No free elections
>East Asia
>Okay this one is legit

who names these places

>>1155181
The south doesn't want to unify - it'd fuck up their livestyles. The refugees who survive can't even integrate, millions of norks would fuck up their society..