US Deploys Two More Carrier Groups to be Directed to Korean Penninsula

[Running Gator]

49 minutes ago, OneLight said:

I am not sure I fully agree as his scud missiles alone, without chemical warheads, did very little damage as they were not accurate.  More of a point and shoot weapon and a surgical  strike.

His missiles and rockets are not all that accurate, which is part of the problem.   They might miss military targets but they will hit something.  Also, all of the anti-missile defense is around the military bases, thus making it harder to hit inaccurate missiles.  Then you have 8000 plus pieces of long range artillery and almost 6000 multiple rocket launchers, all of which can rain indiscriminate destruction south of the DMZ.  Without ever sending a troop over the DMZ they could basically destroy Seoul and Osan.  

[Running Gator]

3 minutes ago, The_Patriot2017 said:

Well, first they did find evidence of WMDs and chemical weapons, but even then let's assume you have a point, there is a difference. Saddam wasn't threatening to launch nukes at us or our allies, north Korea has, and they do, beyond any shadow of a doubt, have nukes.

NK has threatened to use nukes if attacked, other than that when have they ever threatened to nuke anyone?  All of their trash talk is about what will happen if they are attacked.

[Running Gator]

51 minutes ago, OneLight said:

I would hope that any action taken would remove this threat first as they are our allies  and our own troops.  Even I can see the damage NK could do if this threat was not first removed.

How effective could we be at removing 8000 plus pieces of long range artillery and almost 6000 multiple rocket launchers using only air strikes missiles? 

[The_Patriot21]

34 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

How effective could we be at removing 8000 plus pieces of long range artillery and almost 6000 multiple rocket launchers using only air strikes missiles? 

Rather effective, actually if we actually launched a all out, assault with nothing held back, especially if we managed to catch them by surprise. With that said, an assault like that would likely be enough to make even our allies mad at us. 

[OneLight]

55 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

How effective could we be at removing 8000 plus pieces of long range artillery and almost 6000 multiple rocket launchers using only air strikes missiles? 

Why limit a strike to using only missiles?

 

Edited to add that the DMZ is only 160 miles long.  In comparison, that is not a very long border.  Probably would not get them all on the first strike, but it sure could clear out the majority.  Nothing is ever perfect.

[The_Patriot21]

3 aircraft carriers boast a large assortment of aircraft....not to mention the air force resources in the area. We could easily have B-1s overhead as well as B-2 stealth bombers and others. We have enough of an air presence to triple their offensive capabilities and keep their defensive missiles and AAA very, very busy. A well coordinated attack while probably won't destroy everything, will likely send their military into a state of panic, slowing down am effective counter attack, Assuming we got them by surprise and held nothing back. 

[Running Gator]

11 minutes ago, OneLight said:

Why limit a strike to using only missiles?

Sorry, that was a typo, was supposed to say missiles and air strikes.

[Running Gator]

Wow, we do have a lot of war hawks on this board! 

[OneLight]

What do you mean by war hawks?  I see some who have served and speak out of their experience, and I see others who speak our of some sort of fear.  There may also be those who are all about Make Americas Great Again without understand what a war like this would mean.

[Guest Teditis]

I seriously doubt that this whole move with the Aircraft Carriers will amount to much... it's nothing but posturing...

N.K. will go back into it's hole and stay quiet after awhile and things will "normalize" again soon.

Meanwhile, the US will put U2s and E3s over the North Koreans and gather intel.