So what happens when North Korea operates a fleet of road-mo

>>33358099
>So what happens when North Korea operates a fleet of road-mobile, solid fuel missiles able to throw a nuclear warhead anywhere in the ROK/Japan?
America laughs at them from their Mars base

>>33358099
No, ABM nullifies that factor. They're too late to the ballistic missile game to pretend they're relevant.

>>33358099
They would only ever use them if they knew they were going to lose. They are basically bargaining chips that can leave craters.

Why do we let these banana republics develop these weapons with impunity? Letting more people sit at the big boy's table is not working out at all for us.

File: laugh emoji faec.png (516KB, 720x811px) Image search: [Google]

516KB, 720x811px

>>33358128
>ABM
>nullifing anything
serious replies only please

>>33358099
We set THAADs around their entire border region, blare K-pop about hamburgers and wait for them to all kill themselves when grorious reader stubs a toe

>>33358141
Because A: retarded soccer moms and other libtards droning on about how they aren't dangerous and we should be tolerant, and B: the last time we did an invasion into a developing country with """wmds""" it turned into a shitstorm.

>>33358141
8 years of Obama has emboldened the Chinese and their puppets

>>33358099
there is a decent chance that they will be ground zero of ww3.

but most likely, China decides that THAAD isn't leaving unless best korea gets some ack rite.

the chinks will likely yank on lil' kim's leash and threaten to support a politburo if he doesn't remove his head from his third point of contact. he chooses weather or not he wants to be assassinated or continue ruling.

if he chooses poorly, there will be some game of thrones shit and chingchong land will immediately praise the generals or whomever for bringing stability to the peninsula.

South Korea rattles a saber, best Korea rattles a smaller saber, and after three months of nothing, THAAD goes back to Guam.

File: nork runway mountain.jpg (300KB, 2192x1500px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 2192x1500px

>>33358130
Not at all. Nuclear weapons represent their only chance to 'win'. If they do not use their nukes early they will lose them to air attack/SOF, and if they allow the US to build up sufficient forces in the ROK to invade they will lose the ground war, as their conventional military strength is far lower than that of the US or ROK.

Instead, the most rational decision for the DPRK leadership to make would be to hit the ROK and US bases in Japan hard with everything they have; that way they have a chance of denying the US the chance to build up forces.

Should that happen, the US will have do decide whether they should retaliate in turn with their own nuclear weapons; if they do they run the risk of a further DPRK strike on civilian targets inside Japan and the ROK, and (if the DPRK possesses the capacity by this point) and ICBM attack on the US proper.

All scenarios end with the eventual destruction of the DPRK government (unless the horror of losing > 30,000 Americans in a few hours turns public support away from further conflict) and the death of the Kim family, but of all the options on the table the early, massive nuclear attack strategy is the one that presents Kim with the best chance of success.

>>33358202
The Japanese made the mistake of thinking America would give up too.

If Kim nukes Commifornia I cannot imagine America ever "giving up".

File: I Swear to god.jpg (71KB, 800x516px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x516px

>>33358202
That picture is some battlefield 4 map pack shit
And it seems entirely unnecessary. Like, its not like there isnt enough flat land around.
still cool as fuck though.

>>33358099
>>33358099
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSYkBUaeWDE

>>33358202
When I was in the army, I was stationed twice in south korea. We had files that showed how long each building/bridge/area was supposed to last incase the north invaded. Spooky stuff, knowing the area you were in was supposed to hold out for 20 minutes.

File: nork ATGM team.jpg (502KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 1600x900px

>>33358292
You wonder why the bother going to those lengths to protect aircraft that will be of little use anyway.

>>33358267
But it isn't 1941 anymore. If we assume 30,000 US dead from the get go (this is the number of US troops deployed in the ROK, not counting families, other civilians or those in Japan) with the promise of many more, might the US resort to an air campaign in place of a ground war? The US population of the 1960s didn't handle the casualties of Vietnam well, and in this hypothetical situation the body count would be rising much faster.

Nuking California would be an option reserved for if the US decided to use their own nuclear arsenal, besides if the US did opt for the extended air campaign they would probably lose that capacity. As far as I know the DPRK doesn't have a missile that can reach that far as of 2017 (if we aren't counting ones that need to be fuelled atop a launchpad where they are highly conspicuous and easy to destroy).

>>33358170
Regarding A: No, literally nobody says that. It's North Korea and they're nuclear weapons.

>>33358141
muh westphalian sovereignty
muh ww3 with china

>>33358355
>US population of the 1960s didn't handle the casualties of Vietnam well, and in this hypothetical situation the body count would be rising much faster.

With provocation no one in America will give one rotten shit about what happens to North Koreans, they will use Nuke/Chem/Bio/Radiological weapons on them if they have to.

Vietnam didn't nuke California.

So who is giving the orders to US shills dince so many appointees aren't there?
Are my shitposts printed to paper for FRA compliance?

PS DPROK lacks a 20 ton tjrow weight on motors. They're still in emplaced and heavy bomber phase.

Nothing happens.

Every time the media reports that a Nork missile "fell into the ocean" it means the U.S. Navy shot down one of their missiles.

We propagandize about them.

>>33358099
>So what happens when North Korea operates a fleet of road-mobile, solid fuel missiles able to throw a nuclear warhead anywhere in the ROK/Japan?

Not much, they'll basically be above ground stationary launchers because the Nork's won't be able to fuel them to have them be road mobile.

>>33358355
>Nuke california
>only 30k casualties
wow anon. You have no idea where to even start; do you?

>>33359899
>yfw the Chinese are funding the Nork's missile development so they can observe how US forces would go about disabling them.

>>33358181

Best Koreas first nuclear test was in 2006 you mong

File: retarded.gif (1002KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 320x240px

>>33359925
He's referring to the number of US troops in SK
>(this is the number of US troops deployed in the ROK, not counting families, other civilians or those in Japan)

Maybe you should learn 2 read faggot

>>33358099
I think people are more scared that North Korea might nuke itself.

>>33358146
>I live in a box where the world never changes and my anecdotal evidence is all that matters

>>33358202
LOL, the mountain caved in on them.