Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US fears 'hell' of a response
au ^ | October 12, 2006 | Mark Dunn

Posted on 10/11/2006 7:03:38 PM PDT by Flavius

PLANS previously drafted by the Pentagon predict 52,000 US military casualties and one million civilian dead in the first 90 days of conflict if America attacked Pyongyang. The US leadership is looking at international economic and diplomatic sanctions against North Korea as its primary response to Monday's nuclear test.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: exterminatethepests; getitoverwith; goodbyechiapet; kimjongmakesusill; northkorea
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last
To: bannie
Didn't the Drive By Media take special joy in telling us how Colin Powell had ordered 50,000+ body bags for 'OPERATION INFINITE JUSTICE'?
21 posted on 10/11/2006 7:13:26 PM PDT by airborne (Gee Dub is 'Da Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

Within 5 hours the NOrth Koreans would send 1 million men across the demilitarized zone and overwhelm our forces as well as kill a million in Seoul.


22 posted on 10/11/2006 7:13:36 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

A quagmire I tell you.


23 posted on 10/11/2006 7:13:58 PM PDT by HangThemHigh (Entropy's not what it used to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: airborne

"Where have I heard these dire forecasts before?"

Don't worry, the RATS will be on TV with a body bag count tomorrow.


24 posted on 10/11/2006 7:14:14 PM PDT by freedom4me ("Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom."--Ben Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
I wonder if everyone Kim Jong Il counts on to defend his power would remain loyal in all out hostilities, but with Chinese help anything could be possible.
25 posted on 10/11/2006 7:14:17 PM PDT by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StormEye
Just nuke the bastards and be done with it.

And what is SK? Chopped liver?

Nuke NK and our troops and SK people will get hit with the aftermath and die too. Today's nukes are 50 times more powerful than the firecrackers that exploded over Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

26 posted on 10/11/2006 7:14:48 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: StormEye

How ridiculous. Just nuke the bastards and be done with it.
There is no reason to accept any American causulties in a war with the North Koreans.


EXACTLY!!!!

What on earth is President Bush waiting for??? For Iran and N.Korea to get nukes and ICBMs?

Some people worry about foreign civilian casualties, well I worry about AMERICAN ones.


27 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:19 PM PDT by TomasUSMC ((FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: airborne

My thought, too. I think the MSM pulls this out of their files each year.


28 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:21 PM PDT by bwteim (bwteim = Begin With The End In Mind --- There is no such thing as a FRee Lunch. Pay your share ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: airborne

Oh, duh. I forgot.
(put red face here)

:-| thank you


29 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:34 PM PDT by bannie (HILLARY: Not all perversions are sexual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

There would be millions killed in Seoul.

They have tens of thousands of in-ground mortars (big ones) pointed directly at Seoul and I read in a report that they would be able to lob over 12,000 500 pound artillary shells into the city in less than 12 hours.

The only way to prevent such an event would be multiple tactical nukes North of the DMZ.


30 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:34 PM PDT by Paloma_55 (I may be a hateful bigot, but I still love you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: StormEye
How ridiculous. Just nuke the bastards and be done with it.

We will not go nuclear first. We will not go nuclear unless Kim is able to detonate on our soil, even if he tries to do so. We will detonate only if we are hit with WMD.

31 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:36 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

There is a problem, because Seoul with its large civilian population is so close to the DMZ. It would be a nasty war, IMHO.

Even so, war may be a better choice than the alternatives.

I don't think sanctions are realistic. In the first place, they would be meaningless without China's cooperation, which is doubtful. In the second place, the ordinary people of North Korea are already starving. What good would it do to starve even more of them? Kim Jong Il couldn't care less. In fact, he'd probably enjoy it. It would make him feel important.


32 posted on 10/11/2006 7:15:50 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
PLANS previously drafted by the Pentagon

I think the "previously" must mean 1954.

33 posted on 10/11/2006 7:16:10 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("We have always been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be detested in France"--Wellington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flavius
"But military contingencies are considered as a matter of course and analysts paint a horrific picture for even the most targeted of US strikes."
34 posted on 10/11/2006 7:16:34 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Billthedrill
"52,000 US military casualties"?? Horse manure.

First, NK has a massive number of people in its military, and a lot of military hardware (practically its entire GNP has been used to build up its military instead of feed its people).

Second, keep in mind that NK has an unknown number of "nuclear devices" now, and missiles. One nuke lobbed over (or driven using a nondescript truck into) the highest concentration of US troops in the region would produce a very large number of casualties.

35 posted on 10/11/2006 7:17:49 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bannie

I'm just grateful that my long term memory still works!


36 posted on 10/11/2006 7:17:51 PM PDT by airborne (Gee Dub is 'Da Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: TomasUSMC
Just nuke the bastards and be done with it

Sir, it's not that simple. SK is right over the border. Any nuclear explosion, the aftereffects will hit SK and Japan. Possibly the major cities in China near NK as well.

37 posted on 10/11/2006 7:18:00 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

These are the same sort of "experts" who were were calculating how many would die in the trenches, and how long the Maginot line would hold should the Germans attack.


38 posted on 10/11/2006 7:18:56 PM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Songwriter

BTTT


39 posted on 10/11/2006 7:19:04 PM PDT by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Flavius

I bet this is a really true assessment from the insides of the Pentagon. Gasp!!


40 posted on 10/11/2006 7:19:17 PM PDT by o_zarkman44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson