patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,064 comments by 15,737 users - Ceffer, HANrongli, Misc, Patrick, stfu online now
« First « Previous Comments 15 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
fdhfoiehfeoi
@
2017 Apr 27, 11:39am
What's With North Korea?
They're a failed state who can't keep the lights on let alone assemble anything remotely useful. I fully expect to see Kim Jong-Un's head on a pike in my lifetime, and it won't have shit to do with the US.
Never underestimate the power of our weapons technology.
Never underestimate the power of China's weapons technology when we piss them off with a war on their border.
Stupid Americans!
http://www.newsweek.com/carl-vinson-cannot-shoot-down-missile-590106
Y
@
2017 Apr 27, 11:59am
Can we just get them to join patnet?
I always do my taunting from afar...
As I mentioned earlier to Blue Sardine join me in October when I go over to South Korea. We can take a run up to the DMZ and taunt the North Korean guards and if we are really good, set off an international incident.
Strategist
@
2017 Apr 27, 12:02pm
Never underestimate the power of our weapons technology.
Never underestimate the power of China's weapons technology when we piss them off with a war on their border.
Stupid Americans!
http://www.newsweek.com/carl-vinson-cannot-shoot-down-missile-590106
"To take down a missile, the carrier would need to possess an Aegis surveillance system, experts told Bloomberg News Wednesday. It's not just the USS Carl Vinson that lacks that capability, but also South Korea and Japan’s largest battleships and the three other American warships "
So use the Aegis. Problem solved.
RWSGFY
@
2017 Apr 27, 12:44pm
And to disable the Carl Vinson one or maybe two well placed torpedoes (the low tech cheap kind) into the rudders and propulsion system area and then we have a very yuuugely expensive sitting duck.
Doing this might be easy only if we're talking about Russian so-called "aircraft carrier" traveling with 5 Su on board (ooops, they recently lost 2 landing at sea, so make it 3 Su), a tugboat and nothing else. American AC's go about their business surrounded by Carrier Strike Group. It means that whoever is going after AC will need to go through one or two Aegis-class cruisers, two to three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, up to two attack submarines not to mention the fucking carrier air wing. Good luck with your low tech cheap weaponry - you'll need a lot of it.
fdhfoiehfeoi
@
2017 Apr 27, 12:54pm
I fully expect to see Kim Jong-Un's head on a pike in my lifetime, and it won't have shit to do with the US.
That is a very distinct probability however what comes next may be even harder to deal with and control and much like today we won't like that situation either.
Good thing it's not our country, or any of our business.
RC2006
@
2017 Apr 27, 3:28pm
Drinking the official beverage from Washington are you now ?
Not drinking anything I think it would be a bad idea, but if your going to mass a bunch of equipment and line them up like that on a beach nobody is impressed, its like they are 200 years behind in thinking about warfare.
In todays world, the one with better technology wins the wa
How well did that work out in Vietnam? or for the Russians in Afghanistan? or for the US in Afghanistan?
oing this might be easy only if we're talking about Russian so-called "aircraft carrier" traveling with 5 Su on board (ooops, they recently lost 2 landing at sea, so make it 3 Su), a tugboat and nothing else. American AC's go about their business surrounded by Carrier Strike Group. It means that whoever is going after AC will need to go through one or two Aegis-class cruisers, two to three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, up to two attack submarines not to mention the fucking carrier air wing. Good luck with your low tech cheap weaponry - you'll need a lot of it.
or maybe not. The modern diesel/electric submarines like the song (which the chinese very well may have supplied to nk) and lada are pretty formidable weapons. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/could-sink-the-us-navy-lethal-stealth-submarines-15034
Y
@
2017 Apr 27, 8:39pm
Pretty good, since none of the conflicts listed below were 'declared wars'...
In todays world, the one with better technology wins the war
How well did that work out in Vietnam? or for the Russians in Afghanistan? or for the US in Afghanistan?
Ceffer
@
2017 Apr 27, 8:50pm
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
propose RADIO! FREE! APOCALYPSE!
USAID can air drop cheap radios with one channel - ME! - who will regale them with entreaties to stump fuck Kimfuck 24/7.
They'll call you "ApocalypseFuck Rose"!
Strategist
@
2017 Apr 27, 9:48pm
In todays world, the one with better technology wins the wa
How well did that work out in Vietnam? or for the Russians in Afghanistan? or for the US in Afghanistan?
They chose not to use some of the technology they had........Nukes.
I agree with most of your opinion. Kim Jong-un is currently threatening that they could put up an annihilating strike. I think humanity would not be able to survive the war between two countries. A diplomatic solution is really urgently needed
Strategist
@
2017 May 1, 8:39pm
I agree with most of your opinion. Kim Jong-un is currently threatening that they could put up an annihilating strike. I think humanity would not be able to survive the war between two countries.
North Korea does not have that capability yet. The idea is to destroy their capabilities before they achieve that.
« First « Previous Comments 15 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
It seems like North Korea's president would not back down as long as the US continues to show aggression. Tighter sanctions should be implemented. There be another nuclear test and that will be the sixth one. The thing is, the North Korean government announced that they would never stop their nuclear tests.
Any thoughts about this?