You are either a troll or suffer from dyslexia. Did you even bother reading what I wrote. You have not been a good student. They dont claim 1 million soldiers you troll. I wrote 180 000 just above. Did you bother reading it? What quality? I just described what 3 NK special force personnel did during the "1996 Gangneung submarine infiltration incident" You did not bother to read that one also? There you understand what kind of quality the 180 000 NK special forces are.
I wasn't referring to you,there were reports on TV,mistaken or not,that NK claimed they had over 1,000,000 special forces. That was a few years ago.
Now,you might accuse me of stuff,but apparently you can't compare military hardware? And you always believe that the old "guerilla tactics" that worked in Vietnam or Afghanistan,would work in Korea? There are factors that would turn the war in favor of the South,if China and the US didn't interfere of course.
- The superiority in weapons and equipment quality of South Korea
- The fact that South Korea has double the population,hence could gather more men and women for the war effort.
- The morale of the North,where millions would probably prefer to just defect to the South or see the regime collapse
- The food and other supplies for the North that might be dwindling fast or stocked up for the elite only.
Against all that,the usual arguements are: "But the North are tougher 'cause they don't listen to K-pop,watch soap-operas and play PC games" or "they can fight a guerilla war because they have many tunnels and bunkers and mountains".
Eh...I don't think so. I mentioned Saddam again because he too boasted of having the world's 4th largest army and he too was a dictator and he too thought that his old Soviet equipment was great,until the coalition came and destroyed it.
So what? Your claim was that South Korea could defeat and occupy North Korea. The attacker is needs a 3 to 1 advantage which is not present here.
Depends. The defender might collapse faster. The attack might easier. We're talking about a country that has a big part,if not the majority of the population,displeased and fed up with the regime and life there.
Once again not enough to defeat North Korea let alone occupy it like you claim. Also look at the geography of North Korea.
It's not just the armor though,is it? it's also the jet fighters,the bombers,the attack helicopters,the AWACS,the Navy Fleet.
Considering that a Syrian S-200 shot down a Israeli F-16. They may still be useful. Looks like you have not done your research properly. Why is the KN-06 not mentioned there? The KN-06 is superior the S-300 but inferior to S-400. Another failed argument of yours.
How many S-200s have managed to shoot down Israeli F-16s? Just because it happened once or twice,doesn't mean that South Korean F-16s,F-15s and F-35s will be falling off the sky for fun.
The failed arguement is on your part. What's the credibility on the KN-06? It looks like one of those Iranian "alchemies".
You base your hopes on the fact that there were rare instances of modern aircraft being hit by old Soviet AA systems.
But in most theatres of war in recent times,such systems were just destroyed or bypassed by modern Air Forces.
Typical of you people to use that "dictator" argument lmao.... There is a reason your american masters have not fired a single bullet at North Korea since the Korean war.
Hey,pajeet...I don't have "american masters",unless you consider you have american masters just like some wankers accuse your country of having. What was Saddam? A benevolent leader? A loving president? What were the Kims? Nice and kind leaders? Forgiving and loving?
Also we can see who is ill informed by the quality of the posts. No offence but you sound like a newbie when it comes to military and warfare concept.
Who said that? Abid! ABID! Yalaaaaa!
Ok uncle Abid,sure. Go back to the coffee shop and discuss PMLN politics with your friends.
Look here kid. South Korea is not the US and North Korea is not Iraq. The military gap is far smaller than US-Iraq 1991.
www.thedrive.com
en.wikipedia.org
