The †roll Cave ®™

Off-topic
#8265

ohh yes i said that i even posted the link to that myself , but i said you would certainly get involved if korea or Japan’s mainland was attacked .

not sure about the honour part but id agree anyway everything is down to the money these days .

the reason i dont think you would get involved in taiwan is because its a complicated issue , for one they are not an independent state and i dont think it would make any financial sense , but on the other hand not getting involved would throw all credibility of the US away and your word would mean nothing .

#8266

Again due to our mutual defence treaty, I’m almost positive the officers in command over there have the authority to act. What good is having a fleet there if it has to wait a month for congress to decide?

Well China wouldn’t dare try to invade Taiwan without a strike on the U.S forces near by first. They don’t want us getting involved. So that would give them a green light to hit back.

It depends, if we detected a huge number of activity coming from Chinese forces we would move into defensive positions like we do when they have drills. So it could very well be that they either have to attack us to get through or back down.

This is probably why they are so invested in hacking and shit like that so they could shut us down before we knew what was going on .

Well China has ballistic missiles that when have a conventional load on them, are meant for hitting large targets like cities. And i think it’s safe to say China knows what they want to hit already spies, hacking, satellites ect.

Or if they elect someone the CCP doesn’t like. During Taiwan’s recent election they were leaning towards an anti CCP president. The CCP responded by firing missiles near Taiwan in a clear message.

What about AA that soldiers carry? Surly they have plenty of those, and creating a fortified AA bunker worked very well for the the NVA. Our bunker busters were even unable to penetrate them.

The NVA troops were not hardly push overs. They were actually more experienced on average then the American troops. Remember they had just kicked the French out a few years earlier and our troops were 18 year old conscripts in a lot of cases.

But keep in mind that was in the 1950s. North Korea is at least 30-40 years behind South Korea. It would be like NATO vs Iraq with quantity vs quality. China’s army is still quite in poor shape (see MULTIPLE links above) as they’ve infested more in missile tech and things like that over their troops.

Sure they would be a lot tougher than North Korean troops but i still think South Korea with U.S support could hold them off and make it too costly for them to continue.

#8267

welcome to democracy :slight_smile: unless you can prove to me otherwise . they need approval from the government to begin any combat actions towards another foreign power unless they’re personally attacked .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
Well China wouldn’t dare try to invade Taiwan without a strike on the U.S forces near by first. They don’t want us getting involved. So that would give them a green light to hit back.
[/quote] as i said that was true a number of years ago , not so much anymore .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
It depends, if we detected a huge number of activity coming from Chinese forces we would move into defensive positions like we do when they have drills. So it could very well be that they either have to attack us to get through or back down.

This is probably why they are so invested in hacking and shit like that so they could shut us down before we knew what was going on .
[/quote] thats all well and good but if they remain in their water or international waters , you have no legal right to move against them without congresses approval to do so .

and if you sunk a Chinese ship the reality of nuclear war becomes very real , this is a point we have both over looked here , the US wouldnt go in guns blazing for that very reason of it risking nuclear war .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
This is probably why they are so invested in hacking and shit like that so they could shut us down before we knew what was going on .
[/quote] this is also possible on taiwan that china hacks its radar and shuts it down .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
Well China has ballistic missiles that when have a conventional load on them, are meant for hitting large targets like cities. And i think it’s safe to say China knows what they want to hit already spies, hacking, satellites ect.
[/quote] first priority would be knocking out taiwans air defences , radars , airfields . the whole point of this is to create a scene of utter panic in taiwans high command as they rush to work out exactly what is happening china moves in .

this is where experience is key but of course neither side have any , for a general to be able to back away from the utter chaos and simply get things done and start mobilising his troops .

china would want to secure key points such as ports and airfields as quick as possible , during the first few hours while the taiwan military run around naked which will happen thats the reality of war .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
What about AA that soldiers carry? Surly they have plenty of those, and creating a fortified AA bunker worked very well for the the NVA. Our bunker busters were even unable to penetrate them.
[/quote] again these are locked away not something that are to hand as such like you would think and have limited effect anyway . contrary to what battlefield will have you believe taking out a jet with a shoulder mounted missile is pretty hard .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8266, topic:21032”]
But keep in mind that was in the 1950s. North Korea is at least 30-40 years behind South Korea. It would be like NATO vs Iraq with quantity vs quality. China’s army is still quite in poor shape (see MULTIPLE links above) as they’ve infested more in missile tech and things like that over their troops.

Sure they would be a lot tougher than North Korean troops but i still think South Korea with U.S support could hold them off and make it too costly for them to continue.
[/quote] ohh i have no doubt the south would shit on the north even on their own if the north attacks but the sheer numbers with Chinese troops i think would simply overwhelm the south and even the US .

you’re talking 3 million plus men . and in quick fashion . thats a huge amount . combined with the huge amounts of missiles and artillery .

the south would have to give up most of the country to gather in a proper dug in defensive line to have any real go at defending against that . and hope like fuck the US and NATO as whole can get support there , but again you’re looking at a few weeks to have any great numbers there

#8268

Easiest way to piss off an Englishmen is say how much you like Mel Gibson films. :wink:
;

1 Like
#8269

You say that but Mel Gibson is one of my favourite actors .
Robert de Niro being my favourite though .

#8270

Such a reflex usually means a country is going badly off the rails, though Germany pulled it off with macabre success in the 1930s.

This is a really disturbing sentence.

2 Likes
#8271

@sirwarriant @thedivineinfidel

Nothing makes my day like a member of parliament saying in newspaper interview that he owns a sniper rifle “FOR SELF DEFENSE”

2 Likes
#8272

Really !? Defence from fucking what !

#8273

Well according to official information of the Czech Ministry of Interior an assault rifle is a perfect tool for self defense in case of houses that are in remote areas in case of multiple intruders getting into the estate, especially if any of them are clearly armed.

If they start running because you shoot from assault rifle, but decide to send a couple of rounds back at you from distance, I’d say it is a DGU that does call for a use of a sniper rifle.

I’d agree that generally it is hard to imagine a DGU where a sniper rifle would be the proper tool, but hey, it’s the guy’s damn right to decide which way he wants to defend self and his family.

Oh, did I mention that we still have lower murder rate than UK? :wink:

1 Like
#8274

Really? I thought it was required for English people to hate him.

I actually completely agree with this statement, say if someone owned a lot of land and saw a bunch of armed men approaching their house. Sure the possibility of you facing multiple armed intruders in an remote area is unlikely but not impossible. Sure once they got in the house then you would want another weapon but they might have a lot of ground to cover before they reach you. :wink:

#8275

Well you may be right, how ever China would never attack Taiwan or any other of our allies in the region without attacking us first, to try and remove us from the picture.

No it’s still true, the only thing that has changed is Chinas confidence, and their ability to attack our ships.

To invade Taiwan they would have to leave international waters. Part of the straight belongs to Taiwan if we noticed large a large number of Chinese vessels approaching after Taiwan was bombarded with missiles we could strike.

Again i don’t think any country is going to use nukes unless they are on the brink of being defeated in an invasion of their country. Our nuclear capabilities are years ahead of China and they wouldn’t risk being turned into glass.

Possible, although I’m sure Taiwan would have backup means of detecting Chinese activity in the region.

Well, the DMZ is extremely heavily fortified, and the South would be defending with close to 600,000 well trained well equipped men. I don’t really see how China could take it seeing how it’s being manned by technology better than their own. Not to mention the average Chinese soldiers training mainly consists of propaganda and singing patriotic songs.

And apply your rule of time to China here. They don’t just have 3 million men waiting around in North Korea waiting for an invasion. A large build up like that near the DMZ would be detected fast and the area would be more heavily reinforced. The Chinese troops would also face heavy air strikes, they would be hit with off shore naval support ect.

South Korea actually has an extremely powerful military for how small the country is. They have a larger air force, navy, and army than even the U.K does.

#8276

IMHO you give them a warning shot and if they don’t turn around and run away, they are clear threat.

1 Like
#8277

Of course. Should have mentioned that, but i would say altogether it’s quite unlikely. But it never hurts to be prepared.

#8278

but why bullshit ? why not just give your actual reason for owning it , hunting ? is he scared of a left wing backlash if says he enjoys hunting ?

no sane person serious about home defence would buy a sniper rifle for the job .

#8279

Notice how he said remote area?

1 Like
#8280

not in my experience , he is quite liked here .

[quote=“SirWarriant, post:8274, topic:21032”]
I actually completely agree with this statement, say if someone owned a lot of land and saw a bunch of armed men approaching their house. Sure the possibility of you facing multiple armed intruders in an remote area is unlikely but not impossible. Sure once they got in the house then you would want another weapon but they might have a lot of ground to cover before they reach you.
[/quote] id agree with the assault rifle but a sniper rifle ? home defence ? you fucking sure . i reckon its because he doesnt want the left wing chaining themselves to his gate over his love for hunting

#8281

see , but if you shot someone at say 600 metres with the sniper rifle , how would you justify that kill as self defence ? unless they started firing first . in terms of cezch law i know in the US if you’re on private property the owning can send you to jesus no issue

#8282

Huh, i always see English bashing him on the internet because of the Patriot, and Brave heart.

Well read what i said. Lets say you own a ton of property, and notice several armed men approaching your home from far away. You get out your sniper fire a warning shot and they keep coming. That’s a pretty clear indication they want you dead, so you might as well take advantage of a weapon with long range.

Keep in mind this is not an impossible situation. Especially if you live in South West U.S where drug cartels roam.

See?

#8283

possibly yes , depending if you fired to kill or fired to injure .

id think you would have quite a large legal shit storm to justify it . possibly get cleared on these grounds however

#8284

Well if you saw several heavily armed men coming towards your home, who ignored your warning shot. Would you take them out?

Depends on where you live. I would imagine you would be fine if that happened in the U.S especially if they were trying to kill you.

This entire situation is highly unlikely but not impossible. And if you lived on a large chunk of land wouldn’t you want a high powered sniper possibly even a Barrett? :smile: I would own a fucking tank if i had more than 100 acres.

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz