Alliedassault - 690,000 US servicemen to land in Korea in case of war: Seoul

Alliedassault (alliedassault.us/index.php)

- Politics, Current Events & History (alliedassault.us/forumdisplay.php?f=35)

- - 690,000 US servicemen to land in Korea in case of war: Seoul (alliedassault.us/showthread.php?t=44388)

Quote:

Originally Posted by elstatec

well as long as it doesnt involve any uk troops.

a couple of my teachers say that the uk has become a puppet to the united states, in a way.. eek:

i doubt it is that way though.

A fight with N.Korea would suck. annoy:

[quote="Duke_of_Ray":7fa77]A fight with N.Korea would suck. annoy:[/quote:7fa77]

We fought them before. It wouldn't be that bad, unless we really do underestimate them.

[quote="Jin-Roh":95a68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by elstatec

well as long as it doesnt involve any uk troops.

a couple of my teachers say that the uk has become a puppet to the united states, in a way.. eek:

i doubt it is that way though.[/quote:95a68]

tony blair is the puppet, not the UK, but hopefully he wisens up to the 99.9% of the population here thats against all this shit

NK goverment wants the movie Team America banned in prague. happy:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferich

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro

It just seems like they're asking for a War...last thing Id ask for...but hey if it wets the conservatives whistles, we can't do much about it for 4 years.

I don't see what you mean? All the conservatives didn't get together one day and decide to provoke a war with North Korea.

To me it seems like a cause and effect. Who didn't see this war coming? Especially with some of the crap Kim Jong has been pulling on his own people.

In your opinion...Would you believe Iraq should take priority over North Korea, as it obviouslly has.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro

In your opinion...Would you believe Iraq should take priority over North Korea, as it obviouslly has.

Your question implies that you believe otherwise. What do you propose, bombing North Korea instead of Iraq.

I might be with you in that North Korea is a bigger threat. However, something about this story does not ring true with me.

The US certainly does not have enough active duty troops to send over there. That number may mean total US and S. Korean troops, in which case that would mean a few thousand more Americans.

I'm against it though. All the S. Koreans do is complain about Americans in South Korea. I say the hell with them and bring our guys home. We've held the North Koreans at bay long enough. And, like 99 said, their malnurished asses won't be in any mood to fight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomxtr

The US certainly does not have enough active duty troops to send over there. That number may mean total US and S. Korean troops, in which case that would mean a few thousand more Americans.

We have over a million, last time I checked. rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferich

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro

It just seems like they're asking for a War...last thing Id ask for...but hey if it wets the conservatives whistles, we can't do much about it for 4 years.

In your opinion...Would you believe Iraq should take priority over North Korea, as it obviouslly has.

Personally I think the Iraq war started already so whatever I say won't change that fact and how much of a priority it is. What exactly do you mean priority anyways? They actually care when they're getting shot at? Or need a certain number for an occupation force? They invaded already so I don't see a point in debating about the priority of needing to start a war.

I definately think two conflicts going on at one time would be idiotic and a blunder. One almost fizzled out but still a hotzone - the other could provoke china,nuclear holocaust,etc.

We'll see what happens.

Hell, there's even talk about the US invading Iran.

Well I agree that it would be stupid to fight two wars at once.

[quote="Jin-Roh":01b4c]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomxtr

The US certainly does not have enough active duty troops to send over there. That number may mean total US and S. Korean troops, in which case that would mean a few thousand more Americans.

We have over a million, last time I checked. rolleyes:[/quote:01b4c]

And sending damn near 70% (according to your number) to the far east wouldn't tax the military. rolleyes:

annoy: This is fucking unbelievable...just bring 'em home.

Maybe I'm news retarded, but I can't find anything more about this other than what 90 posted.

http://www.keralanext.com/news/indexread.asp?id=105734

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=636491&C=navwar

Its the same report over and over, but thats probably all you'll get. Mainstream media probably won't touch it, and all the info given is listed in the article, so I doubt you'll get much more than that.