America to the rescue?. pretty much a look into how America's upcoming involvement in solving North Korean hostilities credz to humon for her satw comics. fallout asia
x
Click to expand

America to the rescue?

America to the rescue?. pretty much a look into how America's upcoming involvement in solving North Korean hostilities credz to humon for her satw comics.

pretty much a look into how America's upcoming involvement in solving North Korean hostilities

credz to humon for her satw comics

  • Recommend tagsx
+1766
Views: 65596
Favorited: 132
Submitted: 04/06/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to konradkurze Subscribe to fallout submit to reddit

Comments(403):

[ 403 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#74 - sirbrentcoe (04/06/2013) [-]
wars come and go, but my soldiers stay eternal.    
   
North Korea threatens the United States on a daily basis. If they seriously try anything, that country will be reduced to rubble quicker than you can blink.
wars come and go, but my soldiers stay eternal.

North Korea threatens the United States on a daily basis. If they seriously try anything, that country will be reduced to rubble quicker than you can blink.
#205 to #74 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
Yeah, lets go and kill everybody in North Korea, EVEN THE INNOCENT ONES!!! Don't kill the retarded leaders, no no WE MUST KILL EVERYBODY!!!!




... you must be a genius
User avatar #206 to #205 - sirbrentcoe (04/07/2013) [-]
you must be a ******* retarded, useless, opinionated anon. We will not use Nuclear warfare unless we have to. we have bombs capable of leveling a city block with no radioactive after effects. We have strategic drone strike capability. If we have to, we can level that entire country. Not our first option, but if North Korea tries to nuke the US, or one of the Allies, they will be brought to a swift and terrible end.
#260 to #206 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
apparently everyone in this thread knows the militaries plans
#254 to #74 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
They have 12 million soldiers, enough artillery aimed at Seoul to kill 1 million people on the first day and Seoul is only 35 miles from the DMZ. Which means the KPA could be on its streets within hours of breaking through the border. See if your B-2's get permission to bomb the largest city in Asia.

>imb4 under equipped, they have been producing 200,000 Kalashnikov rifles, 3,000 heavy guns, 200 battle tanks, 400 armored cars every year since 1975.
>inb4 murrican airpower, useless against fast moving, stealth camoed infantry
>inb4 we can just nuke e, it will never happen unless Kim nukes first, which is incredibly unlikely
#295 to #254 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
somebody needs to post that implying explosion gif.

like weapons mean anything when they're in the hands of poorly trained half starved zealots. not to downplay the threat of crazy people with a cause, of course. history speaks of them well enough.

You seriously underestimate air power.
and I don't do this often, but I really must lol at "fast moving stealth camoed infantry." what are you, 14, hot off a session of black ops 2? compare the tech of the DPRK to the U.S. and look into what a predator drone can do.

I will say that catastrophic damage to seoul is a very real and grim threat, but that's putting lipstick on the pig that is your post.
#256 to #254 - sirbrentcoe (04/07/2013) [-]
also, i hear korea has been working on something like...
also, i hear korea has been working on something like...
#255 to #254 - sirbrentcoe (04/07/2013) [-]
did you read the comment further down? i know we won't blow the country off the face of the planet unless we ABSOLUTELY have to. Meaning that if they start attacking allied countries with WMD's, we will make sure they can't do that any more.
#285 to #74 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
It will take more than 5 minutes to blow up..
#123 to #74 - smashingkills (04/06/2013) [-]
This is also a fitting .gif, and is still Walt.
This is also a fitting .gif, and is still Walt.
#145 - mrtwitty (04/06/2013) [-]
You Americans aren't bad for a bunch of smooth skins.
#182 - ieatsnatch (04/07/2013) [-]
Somebody asked me the other day, "Where would you go if a nuclear war were to break out?" I said Hiroshima cause whats the ******* chances of that happening again
#318 to #182 - dtwomutant (04/07/2013) [-]
that's... GENIUS
that's... GENIUS
#54 - mrbarks (04/06/2013) [-]
huuuurrr duuuuurrrr America just wants to nuke North Korea.    
   
   
   
   
ok we can just act like they arent making daily threats to nuke us. inb4 they cant
huuuurrr duuuuurrrr America just wants to nuke North Korea.




ok we can just act like they arent making daily threats to nuke us. inb4 they cant
#57 to #54 - Offspringofwolves (04/06/2013) [-]
dear god thats hilarious
#172 to #54 - coolcalx (04/07/2013) [-]
they can't
User avatar #177 to #172 - ryukyukids (04/07/2013) [-]
that map shows they have a missile that can reach alaska
#178 to #177 - coolcalx (04/07/2013) [-]
>implying anyone cares about Alaska
User avatar #179 to #178 - ryukyukids (04/07/2013) [-]
point taken.
User avatar #259 to #177 - lecherouslad (04/07/2013) [-]
If they killed Sarah Palin, I would join the North Korean Army.
#241 to #177 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
They can reach the north mid west and they have submarines that are missing.
#223 to #177 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
Alaska? What's that?
#411 to #172 - Rascal (05/02/2013) [-]
Lol "no dong"
User avatar #308 to #172 - hauntzor (04/07/2013) [-]
That little sliver of India must be feeling pretty badass.
User avatar #84 to #54 - konradkurze (04/06/2013) [-]
well,...they might try what the nazis tried in ww2

declare war on usa and sneak some spies in with explosive devices

seriously, usa just managed to avoid a nazi spy setting up a radio device on top of the empire state building that would have guided a V2 missile right at it
whos to say north korea wont sneak stuff in

vid related
www.youtube.com/watch?v=aF79U0B_ze0
#60 to #54 - atomschlumpf ONLINE (04/06/2013) [-]
they can't
#144 - Rascal (04/06/2013) [-]
Why does everyone seem to think were going to go straight to nukes?

We could literally just carpet bomb their entire country.
User avatar #219 to #144 - supermegasherman (04/07/2013) [-]
true dat
User avatar #163 to #144 - konradkurze (04/06/2013) [-]
America's strategy for war is based on what there is to gain from the war

for japan, they just wanted a quick win so used nukes

for the middle east, they wanted to steal ********* of stuff and install a puppet government, hence 11 years of normal war
#169 to #144 - herpaderpasaur (04/06/2013) [-]
using a nuke would be stupid
using a nuke would be stupid
#55 - Offspringofwolves (04/06/2013) [-]
hilarious! but north korea is the crazy nuke throwin war monger. we wouldnt use the nukes because of civ casualties and its quite frankly pointless when you such a strong military presence nearby
hilarious! but north korea is the crazy nuke throwin war monger. we wouldnt use the nukes because of civ casualties and its quite frankly pointless when you such a strong military presence nearby
User avatar #81 to #55 - konradkurze (04/06/2013) [-]
im sorry, who nuked civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
#98 to #81 - Offspringofwolves (04/06/2013) [-]
They had a plan to nuke the West Coast of the US. if not them it would've been us. besides an invasion of mainland japan would've killed far more for both Americans and Japanese.
They had a plan to nuke the West Coast of the US. if not them it would've been us. besides an invasion of mainland japan would've killed far more for both Americans and Japanese.
User avatar #102 to #98 - konradkurze (04/06/2013) [-]
well if it was possible to get 2 high level bombers over the 2 cities to nuke them it would have been possible to just drop hi explosive bombs that wouldnt leave the cities nuclear wastelands for a while
User avatar #111 to #102 - Offspringofwolves (04/06/2013) [-]
i understand that but they had already been bombing the cities for months and quite frankly got real tired of it. they wanted to get it over with asap so they threatened with WoMD and japan wouldnt yield and history answers the rest
User avatar #122 to #111 - konradkurze (04/06/2013) [-]
America:
in war, the ends ALWAYS justifies the means
User avatar #196 to #122 - Offspringofwolves (04/07/2013) [-]
not really. we couldve easily just bombed the towns and cities terrorist hide in with that fiasco over in the middle east but we send personnel instead. not that its prevented much, but it could very easily be much worse.
User avatar #216 to #196 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
yeah but the middle east had tons of **** for usa to loot, and a golden opportunity to set up puppet governments under american power
User avatar #238 to #216 - Offspringofwolves (04/07/2013) [-]
I don't understand why you're getting hate so i tried to balance it out but that oil goes everywhere not just america. the puppet regimes may be true but i don't think that would happen because the last regime we set up in the middle east was Saddam's and that didn't fly too well. so i don't think they would be that much of a goldfish to try and setup another so soon. especially with all the turmoil. i just hope the arab spring goes to the rest of the middle east and all this turmoil ends so we can play Olly Olly Oxen Free and get back to furthering humanity
User avatar #251 to #238 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
well yes things werent great under saddam but they were slightly better than under usa, at least saddam kept the corrupt nobles in the country under control..now that saddam is gone the nobles are tearing the **** out of iraq for eaches own gains

thats like usa shooting the lion and letting the jackals have his hunting grounds

the only way to further developing humanity is to stop wars of conquest that only shove change down people's throats, and let each nation blend in slowly as its culture allows
look at russia, when the USSR died, russia slowly recovered and became modernised in its own way

im from east germany, we were slowly modernizing under the ussr, but when the wall came down and we saw what the allies had done to the west so quickly, our first thoughts were 'what the ***** .......such a vast difference between eastern and western germans cuased, and still causes cultural clashes because the west changed too much for us to adapt to
User avatar #257 to #251 - Offspringofwolves (04/07/2013) [-]
iraq is relatively peaceful now from what ive heard i dont know anything about the nobles so i cant contest. nor about the fatherlands culture clashes. Saddam was near genocidal and was boasting of a nuclear weaponry. so the attacks on his people alone called for action on NATO's behalf, america just got the crap for it . Most of the turmoil in the ME is from greed and the fact such an archaic way of thinking still dominates the land. womens rights are literally a joke to most islamic countries. so the gov. trying to set up these enclaves for later development is futile and often half-heartedly done, and often cause more trouble than their worth. as many of the prominent figures are beyond reasoning due to their power trip from which they will never return from, and the fact that those who do want for the change to happen are too afraid to act. its not really conquest when you get nothing and put forth almost everything
User avatar #267 to #257 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
well it raises the issue of there were less problems under saddam and change for the better was more possible under him....when he said jump the nation left the ground,..so any promoting of social improvements were more likely under him

now, with the pack of jackals lording over the country, each preventing change and preventing each other from initiating changes,
#200 to #81 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
Please, don't start that ******** argument.
0
#92 to #81 - douevensax has deleted their comment [-]
#113 - johnnygat (04/06/2013) [-]
War doesn't determine who is right, only who is left
User avatar #168 to #113 - danielph (04/06/2013) [-]
What if you are in the middle?
User avatar #186 to #168 - BlakHoleSun (04/07/2013) [-]
The guy with all the bullet holes in him?
+10
#187 - vicviper **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #357 to #187 - supersaiyajin (04/07/2013) [-]
I know what you mean, the comics are usually "Mildly Funny", but rarely "Laugh Out Loud Funny"
0
#377 to #372 - vicviper **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#8 - solarisofcelestia (04/06/2013) [-]
It begins.
#124 to #8 - imnotkickthecat (04/06/2013) [-]
Needs to be China... but they all look the same through these helmets anyways.
#286 - girrafalopegis (04/07/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#165 - skiskate (04/06/2013) [-]
*Fixed

Its the fatman from fallout that launches mini nukes
User avatar #184 - warlike (04/07/2013) [-]
The US wouldn't launch a nuke, just carpet bomb the **** out of them with B-52s and barrage them from the sea.
#242 to #184 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
Yes, and then the DPRK would proceed to wipe South Korea off of the Earth.
User avatar #249 to #242 - warlike (04/07/2013) [-]
They have one nuke at best. It wouldn't destroy SK. They'd fire one, and then the UN and SK would steam roll through the North. You have to remember, they may have a 1 million man army, but with no food or fuel their army couldn't do much. Plus, at least 50% of the North's army isn't loyal. Given the chance, they'd desert in a heartbeat.
User avatar #304 to #184 - tastypaste (04/07/2013) [-]
WHY THE **** DO SO MANY PEOPLE CONDONE WAR

How about the US does dick at the moment and waits for NK to make the first move. This way, China won't get involved and we won't have ******* WORLD WAR THREE on our hands?

What the **** is it with all this **** YEAH AMERICA ******** ? Our soldiers are still dying on the frontlines, so how about we ******* think about averting a war and not guessing at how the US would attack?
#337 to #304 - ujellybro (04/07/2013) [-]
Did he ever say that America was gonna make the first move? No, he didn't, you need to calm down dude. No right minded person wants war. But with the rate NK is throwing threats at us it's almost imminent. Even China is telling NK to back off, so we'd have UN support, our air and sea superiority, and China back us up too. Hell this whole thing is strengthening our bonds with China. ******* chill dude.
User avatar #397 to #304 - warlike (04/08/2013) [-]
A.) Not condoning war, just talking about our reaction

B.) The US IS waiting for Korea to make the first move.

C.) China is siding more with us in this ordeal, they would only get involved if we actually started a war against them (See B)

D.) I know good and well what sort of sacrifices our men and women are making out there, I myself am enlisted in the US Navy and damn proud of it, so don't you dare preach to me about that sort of ******** .

I don't hope for war, no one in the military does, (except maybe the Marines. They're sort of psycho) I am merely pointing out that IF a flash-point of some sort breaks out, it'd be short and sweet thanks to the might of the US and our Allies.

DEAL WITH IT.
#174 - vicecomx (04/07/2013) [-]
'MURICA!
User avatar #319 - evilpotato (04/07/2013) [-]
The person making these comic is so stupid. No one in USA government has said that they plan to use nukes on north korea.
#365 to #319 - mastercolossus (04/07/2013) [-]
it was altered
User avatar #321 to #319 - lateday (04/07/2013) [-]
IT IS A ******* COMIC!
User avatar #323 to #321 - evilpotato (04/07/2013) [-]
Still, he could've done a more creative joke. He's just banking on people assuming United States don't care about consequences.

I guess I'm slightly butthurt, but I'm trying accept it's just a cheap joke
User avatar #331 to #323 - lateday (04/07/2013) [-]
Well, what's funny to you isn't funny to everyone and vice versa. You are free to be butthurt, my friend.
User avatar #338 to #319 - themanwithnoplan (04/07/2013) [-]
Humon comics, which is what this is based off of, uses stereotypes of countries in the comics Scandinavia and the World.
User avatar #26 - Loppytaffy (04/06/2013) [-]
Wow. Humon would be so pissed if she saw how you bastardised her work.
User avatar #67 to #26 - finni (04/06/2013) [-]
I don't think so. Lots of people do it, but she would be irritated if they didn't say that she created the series.
User avatar #73 to #67 - Loppytaffy (04/06/2013) [-]
But SatW is a source of income for her. It's not right that her work should be ruined like that.
User avatar #75 to #73 - finni (04/06/2013) [-]
It's more like it advertisements for her, rather than ruining it for her. It's like free advertisement. Also, she has a own group on deviant art for SATW fans where they publish fan art all the time.
+6
#35 - thetreasurehunter **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#106 to #35 - Rascal (04/06/2013) [-]
holy **** dude hardcore mode? thats ballsy.
User avatar #69 to #35 - wiinor (04/06/2013) [-]
That's some badass armor. Is it a mod?
0
#71 to #69 - thetreasurehunter **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#313 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
Is OP really that ******* stupid? At what point did the US ever threaten North Korea with nuclear warheads? Yeah, people on the internet aren't the government OP.

If there is a war, the US and South Koreans already have a protocol that they will follow
User avatar #322 to #313 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
anonfag butthurting much?
usa hasnt taken action yet, but this is a caricature of how usa might react
0
#350 to #322 - hammarhead Comment deleted by konradkurze [-]
#334 to #322 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
No, because if you actually knew anything about the real world instead of relying on bull **** from the internet, you would know that the US is part of a resolution to NEVER use nuclear weapons. And at what point would we need to? The US already has protocols in place, specific methods our soldiers have trained for.

How on Earth are you this ignorant?
"US might react"
IT WILL NEVER REACT like that to N. Korea. **** OP go educate yourself
User avatar #339 to #334 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
right, what was i thinking, usa always obeys the rules and accepts the UN protocols for war
*gag*
#341 to #339 - Rascal (04/07/2013) [-]
You mean the fact that it signed the treaty not to use nuclear weapons that it itself created? Yeah okay
User avatar #346 to #341 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
yes, like politicians actually obey the paperwork they write

ever heard of plausible deniability?
if the politicians publically support a certain standard, they can get up to heinous **** behind the scenes because if anyone gets suspicious they can preach "oh no, we didnt do that, we've already said we're against that"
User avatar #352 to #346 - hammarhead (04/07/2013) [-]
listen dumbass, If the US were stupid enough to nuke ANYONE, they wouldve already done so in past conflicts, and WWIII wouldve started.
User avatar #359 to #352 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
usa DID use nukes, twice on japan in fact, sad given how small it is

USA in fact IS stupid enough to use nukes, just after the effects of ww2, they found that nuking an area makes it unsafe to pillage in the post-war stages and generates too much attention for the looters to go unnoticed, so usa holds its nukes back as a last resort just in case it finds it cant win and will take a scorched earth methd as a last ' **** you' to an enemy
just so far, usa hasnt found an enemy with the single minded determination to fight to the end as japan was ready to, that said, theres the 'what if' north korea DOES
User avatar #363 to #359 - hammarhead (04/07/2013) [-]
JJust stop. Where did you get all of this info on a scorched earth policy? The nukes are a means to keep peace. peace by fear overwhelming force. the same tactic used to create the pax romana and pax mongolia, and this method has worked for almost a century now.
User avatar #366 to #363 - konradkurze (04/07/2013) [-]
right....overwhelming force a.k.a "if usa cant win then **** you and your country"

the Romans used overwhelming force through superior troops and tactics.....not sure about the mongolians, but another example of overwhelming force was the Soviet Union....im east german and am willing to admit Russia won ww2 because of their overwhelming force

the only time usa used overwhelming force was when they dumped many thousands of troops onto a couple miles of beach at normandy
usa didnt use nukes on japan as overwhelming force they used them as a terror tactic to crush japanese moral

nukes arent a means to keep peace theyre a means to keep others afraid of them coming towards them, and the only reason usa and the un kick up a fuss about certain countries developing nukes are because those certain countries are showing a lack of fear usa and the un dont like

the only difference is that the UN keeps to certain limits of conduct which equates to asking "please dont do that" while usa plots wars which come down to putting the offending nation over their knee and ******* spanking them like a disobedient child
User avatar #400 to #366 - hammarhead (04/08/2013) [-]
that third and fourth section, yeah that's the point.
User avatar #324 to #322 - Trrave ONLINE (04/07/2013) [-]
I wouldn't even say that. I would just say it is the way that the cartoon character would act. None of those characters really act like their countries any more, which just makes me laugh all the harder. =)
#212 - themastertroller (04/07/2013) [-]
mfw NK threats
[ 403 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)