Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size
Login

Military Photos



Online
There are 280 users online

You can register for a user account here.
Library of Congress

Military Quotes

The starting point for the understanding of war is the understanding of human nature.

-- S.L.A. Marshall

Current poll results


Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ?

Yes52 %52 %52 % 52.04 % (140)
No39 %39 %39 % 39.41 % (106)
I do not know6 %6 %6 % 6.32 % (17)
I have no opinion0 %0 %0 % 0.37 % (1)
Other, please list in comments1 %1 %1 % 1.86 % (5)

Total votes: 269
One vote is allowed per day

[ Voting booth | Other polls ]

Comments

Display Order
Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by SEATJERKER
on Oct 15, 2006

If any military action is required because of NKP' belligerence, I suggest cruie/Tomahawk missles at the target areas that will cause them as much confusion/military loss as possible. It would also avoid collateral damage, although that is a lessening condition in my mind. Enough missles should be readily available so that a continuous flow of organized death by air is delivered. The NKP needs to have their collective noses bloodied quite handily in order for them to get the message. Explicit with our missles shold be the warning that any cross-border exccursion/invasion by the NKP will result in massive bombing, to include nukes. Call the bastards' bluff.


Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by
on Oct 16, 2006
... No, pull them off, and out, and send in the Air Force with enough heavy eq. to not only blody their lip, but knock out a few teeth in the meantime,...

...lighting off a nuke, even a "small" one should be reason enough to take full action, and squash any, and all aspirations of further development,...

...

Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by Anonymous
on Nov 01, 2006

With 25+ thousand, (all over the country) they wouldn't make a dent, on the front lines. And as previously said, RAIN from the air, enough necessary to get more than their attention. And understand when that is done, Seoul is destructed. Plus the North has been digging underground tunnels etc., for 50+ years, so it would take a CONTINUED air effort to get the results necessary.


Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by Anonymous
on Nov 25, 2006
What Scout said, or something very similar to that.

More troops there won't solve a thing, nor (for the moment) will fewer.

Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by Anonymous
on Dec 07, 2006

AMEN to scout!!!


Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by Anonymous
on Jan 01, 2007

No, we shouldn't increase U.S. forces. in South Korea. let the host countries handle their own security. We should not be the "worlds keeper'. In this day and age of nuclear power, conventional forces are not any deterent to aggressive nations. Pull out all U.S. troops.


Re: Should U.S. force strength be increased on the DMZ in li
by Anonymous
on Jan 01, 2007

There is no such thing as a "small nuke". Let South Korea handle the situation. Japan needs to get off their ass and increase their own military security and quit using the US Military. Let Japan spend some money on military hardware and quit selling Toyotas at cheap, bargain prices (because they have no Federal tax for this military expense) around the world while big daddy U.S. protects them!


Only logged in users are allowed to comment. register/log in
Military History
Forum Posts

Military Polls

I joined the military at age:

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 422

This Day in History
1813: Fifteen U.S. gunboats engage three British ships in Hampton Roads, VA.

1815: Trials of Fulton I, built by Robert Fulton, are completed in New York. This ship would become the Navy's first steam-driven warship.

1862: Union gunboats occupied the Stono River above Cole's Island, South Carolina, and shelled Confederate positions there.

1863: A heavy combined Army-Navy bombardment of Vicksburg, lasting 6 hours, hammered Confederate positions.

1864: General John Bell Hood's Confederate force attack William T. Sherman's troops outside of Atlanta, Georgia, but are repulsed with heavy losses.

1864: Side-wheelers U.S.S. Morse, Lieutenant Commander Babcock, and U.S.S. Cactus, Acting Master Newell Graham, dislodged Confederate batteries which had opened fire on Army supply wagon trains near White House, Virginia.

1866: 50 Marines and Sailors landed at new Chwang, China, to assure punishment for those who attacked an American official.

1881: Five years after General George A. Custer's infamous defeat at the Battle of Little Bighorn, Hunkpapa Teton Sioux leader Sitting Bull surrenders to the U.S. Army, which promises amnesty for him and his followers.

1898: During the Spanish-American War on the way to the Philippines to fight the Spanish, the U.S. Navy cruiser Charleston seized the island of Guam.

1900: Chinese begin siege of foreigners in Beijing. Military delegations in the “Foreign Quarter” including the US Marine delegation band together to defend their charges.