The last conventional war America fought with anywhere close to near peer was Korea, and they lost.

The last conventional war America fought with anywhere close to near peer was Korea, and they lost. How does the United States expect to do in conversational war with no experience?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    morongay

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >and they lost
    Last time I was in Seuol I didn't see any portraits of Kim, so I'm guessing we did not in fact lose

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lol, goyim mad they couldn’t even defeat 5’2 yellow munchkins.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >us: defend the south from the red hordes
        >china: defeat the south to push whitu pigu from Asia
        Idk man

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If the US didn't defeat them then why is South Korea not forcibly reunified and why is the peninsula covered in US bases?

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Lol, goyim mad they couldn’t even defeat 5’2 yellow munchkins.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Uh oh. What happened in bug land that has caused chang to come out of his hidey hole?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They've practically run out of water in some places and it's effecting energy production (they use significant hydroelectric generation) and they are being cooked by a heatwave, and it's apparently pretty bad. If you see posts meme-ing on Europe or the States over things like water availability and "energy crisis," odds are good that it's not a vatnik and just Chang trying and failing at not being a 5 year old as he tries to pull some "look over there not over here" propaganda.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >chinese achieve strategic goals in the second phase offensive
    >third phase offensive is a phyrric victory
    >fourth phase is a failure
    >fifth phase is another failure
    >war ends status quo antebellum, which is an accomplishment of the primary goal of the UN forces, the preservation of the south

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Tfw when the global super power can’t beat the newly industrialised rising power that it had centuries of a head start over

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We weren’t allowed to drop nukes because everyone was gay

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We did beat them though. We kicked the chinks and norks out of the south

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >confusing "can't" and "won't"
        it's ok, that's one of those things they'll teach you in your ELL class.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >only have 300,000 units in theatre at the time
        >700,000 of the local korean units are virtually useless in offensive operations and forced to largely take the battle on their own
        >absolutely annhilate the chinese in every major battle
        >establish a defensive line that the chinese cannot overcome and take 5 chinese losses for every 1 of their own despite being outnumbered
        it turns out, being a global super power allows each deployed unit to be something like 16x as effective per-man when you factor in the exponential increase of force concentration

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Last conventional war China fight with anywhere close to near pear was Vietnam, and they lost. How does China expect to do in conversational war with no experience?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Vietnam tires out the Americans until they give up and go home
      >Vietnam then goes and stomps the Khmer Rogue to make them stop murdering Vietnamese farmers
      >China screeches autismally and goes to attack, because don't attack my Cambodiarinoooo
      >Vietnam stomps China too
      I respect those morons like you wouldn't believe.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the moment war breaks out in the South china sea they will take back the spratly islands for Ho Chi Minh.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah you have to grudgingly respect Charlie.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        This.
        They might be reds but at least they got guts.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Dont fuck with Charlie I guess

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Vietnam wasn't a peer opponent, China still lost badly anyway. Kicking the shit out of those cunts and the Khmer Rouge single-handedly redeemed the Vietnamese commies, in my book.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Didn't chinks invade Vietnam just to get kicked out?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      vietnam-sino war technically ended on a stalemate, chinese take a tiny slice of land but ultimately balance of power remained the same
      china claims that they achieved their political goal of showing off that they could destroy vietnam if they really wanted to and to punish them for invading cambodia, thefore victory

      but china has a habit of looking as "ended in a military draw" or "war ended inconclusively" then stamping their feet and claiming victory

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Can't monkeyman do the same with Ukraine? Just fuck off and claim he got what he wanted.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          vietnam still cost Johnson his presidency and Korea cost Truman his.

          Putin without his "presidency" is a dead man.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ukraine could just keep fighting. It's obvious they want Crimea back.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Missiles chang
    All varieties

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/iqLr7cZ.jpg

      >Lol, goyim mad they couldn’t even defeat 5’2 yellow munchkins.

      God, i can just imagine your greasy little plump fingers FRANTICALLY searching through your dedicated chinkjak folders at the slightest mention of the US's mediochre to horrible performance against China in Korea lmao. No response, no argument, just a desperate last-minute dopamine top-up. Mutts have no right whatsoever to call any other country's inhabitants 'fragile.'

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >he says, without a hint of self awareness, dipping into his "amerigoblin" folder and scrolling, settling on amerigoblin meme 20b to represent his feelings

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >NOOOOOOOOOO U DO IT TOO
          cry me a river, mutt. Deep down, you know precisely why the Korean War is a black hole in the American consciousness.
          After all, the fact that UN armored platoons were sometimes overrun with Chinese troops with literally NO weapons whatsoever isn't something you'd particularly like to draw attention to, is it?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Korean War is a black hole in the American consciousness because nothing happened. There wasn’t a significant victory or defeat. We don’t celebrate if we don’t win, and we don’t remember if we don’t lose. We just fought, maintained status quo, and left.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >he thinks the UN and US is the same entity
            Ohh so you’re a Serbian.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >mediochre
        lol all that SAT prep has exposed you, chang.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Ching chong chang? Chang?! Ching ching chong!

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Korean war near peer
    >zhangs believing their own propaganda
    LOL

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So we lost to an inferior?

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Honestly I feel like the best way to characterize the Korean War was that it was a draw.

    The US and South Korea failed to reach the Yalu. China, the Soviet Union, and North Korea failed to overrun the South. And the DMZ isn't too far from the 38th Parallel. So the end result of the war was more or less the status quo antebellum

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A military draw means different things to each participant
      A draw can be considered a major victory for UN/SK forces, the main goal was to prevent the overrun of south Korea
      Its a minor victory for the chinese, as they were unable to expel UN forces from the peninsula but stll kept a buffer state between them and Western powers
      But NK os undoubtedly the loser as their army was basically shattered and every city pummeled and they gained absolutely nothing out of a draw

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The main goal was to prevent the overrun of South Korea
        I feel like that was the initial goal, but the US and South Korea obviously also hoped to liberate the North, otherwise they wouldn't have tried to reach the Yalu in the first place. So I'd say it was a victory but not a "overwhelming victory"

        >Its a minor victory for the chinese, as they were unable to expel UN forces from the peninsula but stll kept a buffer state between them and Western powers they were unable to expel UN forces from the peninsula but stll kept a buffer state between them and Western powers
        I agree with this. Chinese have an annoying tendency to act like the Korean War was an overwhelming victory for them, but I don't think it's fair to say they lost. For an army that was horribly underequipped and just coming out of a civil war, the Chinese performed pretty well against one of the most powerful countries in the world at the time. The Korean War was probably the first time in over a 100 years where the Chinese didn't suffer an outright loss against a foreign army.

        >But NK was undoubtedly the loser as their army was basically shattered and every city pummeled and they gained absolutely nothing out of a draw
        Also agree with this. Then I think the best way to sum up the Korean War was that it was a tie or a draw for everyone except North Korea. In their case it was clearly a defeat. But they were pretty much irrelevant once the Chinese entered the war anyway.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The Korean War was probably the first time in over a 100 years where the Chinese didn't suffer an outright loss against a foreign army
          China objectively won WW2, despite the ROC's shitty performance in it. It doesn't feel like a victory, even to the Chinese, but the fact remains that they won, if only largely because they chose their allies better than Japan. the Japanese empire no longer exists.
          There's also the Sino-French war, which was a stalemate, best described as a Chinese pyrrhic victory on land and a French victory at sea.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >China objectively won WW2, despite the ROC's shitty performance in it. It doesn't feel like a victory, even to the Chinese, but the fact remains that they won, if only largely because they chose their allies better than Japan
            Nah you could ask most Chinese and they would consider WWII their victory even if it was mainly US and Soviet actions that forced the Japanese to surrender. This isn't to discount Chinese contributions to the war. The Japanese being forced to fight a two-front war in both China and the Pacific definitely helped hasten their defeat. But it's not like the Chinese would have beaten Japan on their own.

            I'd say the Korean War was different from WWII in that while WWII was mainly the Allies coming to China's rescue, the Korean War was the Chinese coming to the rescue of their allies instead of the other way around for once. It could also be argued that the PRC during the Korean War received less support than the ROC during WWII, since Soviet contributions to the Korean War was mainly limited to providing pilots who were unable to prevent North Korea from being bombed so thoroughly that we literally ran out of things to bomb.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the Chinese performed pretty well against one of the most powerful countries in the world at the time.
          the best thing that can be said about the chinese is that they performed exactly the way you think a very large but under-equipped army would fare against a much smaller but much more advanced army

          they initially make gains when the US is stretched thin, but very quickly run out of steam once they themselves stretch their own supply lines
          and it further proves how the needle was finally turning in favor of quality over quantity, as the air-armor advantage of the allies allowed a division sized element to pin a chinese army-sized element in place

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Honest question: would exposing Chinese positions by shouting in Mandarin "Don't shoot, I'm Chinese!" and then throwing a grenade at them when their guard is down violate the laws of war against perfidy?

    Cause I wanna say that in any other context, I would find it sneaky and underhanded at the very least. But this guy makes Chinese seeth so god damn much, that I'm willing to give him a pass

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >recieved a navy cross
      >makes mainlanders asshurt
      This guy proves we won in korea, since he was never prosecuted for what is objectively underhanded bullshit
      >still pretty funny though

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Honest question: would exposing Chinese positions by shouting in Mandarin "Don't shoot, I'm Chinese!" and then throwing a grenade at them when their guard is down violate the laws of war against perfidy?
      That's a neat combo of perfidy and false flag.
      In war you are supposed to live by the spirit of the laws of war. Why? Well, it's because war is shit and if you dick around too much then nobody accepts any surrenders and everybody gets a nice face full of mustard gas every morning. That serves nobody's interest. So keep your stupid ideas to yourself, they don't win wars.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Lost in Korea
    Stated war goal was enforcing thé UN mandate to restore South Korea's territorial integrity.
    South Korea even gained some territories North of the 38th parallel.
    Mission accomplished.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >conversational war
    But Americans are masters of bullshit.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >conversational war
    So diplomacy?

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >conversational war

    So we just talk to the enemy?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wow is that typ-
      You’re an idiot.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Stealthily nukes your capital city

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >and they lost
    >Korea

    Are you retarded lol?

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    US invaded Iraq that had army equivalent in size and strength to modern russia and took over the country within 2 months with little to no loses.

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >conversational war

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    did we even have near pear wars ?
    iraq - iran? russia - afganistan?

    bullshit like the congo crisis?
    North Yemen Civil War?
    1962 Sino-Indian War
    6day ?
    1979 Rhodesian Bush War?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ignoring civil wars there have only been 2 near peer wars after ww2.
      Iran-Irak and Ukraine-Russia.
      Its funny when two countries are equally matched their ability to wage mobile combined arms warfare degrades incredibly fast and it devolves into trench warfare with light infantry and artillery.
      Modern equipment is also much more expensive, takes alot of time and knowhow to produce, so ww2 style industrial warfare where one side outproduces the other is also kaput.

      The take away is this, the US has no peer at least for now and that is a good thing. A war against an actual peer takes years and it devolves into a brutal endurance match, true hell on earth.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Its funny when two countries are equally matched their ability to wage mobile combined arms warfare degrades incredibly fast and it devolves into trench warfare with light infantry and artillery.
        if they are idiots, maybe

        slow, attritional warfare occurs as a result of lack of space to maneuver or poor logistics preventing the exploitation of a breakthrough
        which is why WW2 was primarily a war of maneuver despite having massively sized combatants on all sides

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The take away is this, the US has no peer at least for now and that is a good thing.
        Half of us navy are outdated scrap, you would lose against the Chinese navy if fought within the 2nd island chain.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          incredibly obvious b8, try again
          >inb4 not bait

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous
        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous
          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            His efficacy unwitnessed by his own eyes

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The US goal in the Korean War was to stop North Korea from annexing South Korea, not unifying the country.

    The US objectively won.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We don't have peers, that's why foreigners cope.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >get slaughtered in your hundreds of thousands
    >fail to destroy south Korea so hard that it becomes one of the most prosperous nations in Asia
    >glorious victory
    another example of faultless Chinese reasoning

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The last conventional war the US fought in lasted like 10 weeks before Iraq capitulated
    >inb4 your pic is from ODS

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Korean War
    >U.S. loss

    um ackshually its still going on

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >was Korea, and they lost
    No they didnt. Mac Arthur push beyond the 38th Parallel beyond the actual goal, defend South Korea. The Chinese initial attack was a success but like the North Korean at Pusan the Chinese had massive logistic problems to push into South Korea which led to a stalemate at the 38th Parallel. Mao and his CCP did they same mistake as MacArthur, wanted to "liberate" the South and didnt listen to his General Peng which broke the entire Logistics. Not the extreme like North Korea who were running out of T34 and combat ready troops at Pusan but they failed to exploit any breakthrough against weaker South Korean Divisions.

    Due the failure of McArthur the US didn't want to push a second time into the North and stick to the 38th Parallel what was actually goal of the entire War. The main issue why it was prolong so long was the diplomatic discussion about Chinese POW who didn't want to go back to China. Of course South Korea and a small proportion of the American public wanted to go on a second offensive and finish the North. South Korea still exist, same as Kyiv is still Kyiv.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A tale as old as time, politicians cucking the military.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And Media, especially in Vietnam. This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive by James S. Robbins is a good read on this topic. The Military requested less men (500k) for a invasion of North Vietnam than in the Peak (585k) two years later of so called nation building in South Vietnam.

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I humbly propose that any war with China be dubbed Operation Ridgeway. It's time to burn more chinks.

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    These autists are all focused on Korea

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    please try to attack the USA you fucking chinks, i want to see you all dead

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >and they lost

    south korea still exists, that was the mission, protect the existence of south korea

    they simply did not win harder by obliterating the north korean regime off the face of the earth, unfortunately for the people now living there

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >War ends in what was basically a draw, concluded with a ceasefire
    >Was still isn't even technically over
    >During the Vietnam war, NK tried to break said ceasefire and overwhelm a reduced US defense force along the DMZ
    >With WW2 era weapons, 12 UH1s and an inexperienced chain of command, the US/SK forces held the line at the DMZ and conducted countless raids into NK held territory to sabotage logistics and resources
    >Even without any serious fortifications outside of observation posts, North Krorea failed to take any ground nor achieve it's goal of deposing the standing South Korean president
    >The NK forces even attempted an assassination of said SK president, the assassins didn't even make it to the presidents house before being exposed and captured
    >After this event, US forces were substantially bolstered and reservists deployed
    >The South Korean president had to be explicitly forbidden from invading North Korea
    >After the buildup of troops on the south side, North Korean raids ceased entirely
    >They are still at war to this day, the North refusing to invade as it does not have the capacity to fight both South Korea and the United States, the South refusing to invade because it's been explicitly forbidden from doing so as to prevent further conflict in the region

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      All correct, aside from the fact the war is by official means over after Trump met Kim in 2017 or 2018 i think? Anyhow i remember they had officially signed the ending of the war after 70 years.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You're right, I 100% forgot that was a thing.

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    when and why did this ''America lost the Korear War'' meme started

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      When America got its ass handed to them by the Chinese and had to sue for peace.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >When America got its ass handed to them by the Chinese
        ?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The war isn't even over lad.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's baitposting mixed with wumao, not an organic meme

      https://i.imgur.com/B17zIXZ.png

      >When America got its ass handed to them by the Chinese
      ?

      don't forget to look at details, even the Chinese sources say they were slaughtered like pigs (or defected) while the vast majority of war dead on the other side of the aisle were South Koreans

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The US defeated the combined forces of China, the Soviet Union, and the Korean bandit miltiias in Korea. The Chinese actually fought even more poorly than the Korean bandit forces, taking over 10 fatalities for every one inflicted. Meanwhile the US was quite literally pulling its punches, because Truman lacked the resolve to employ nuclear weapons.

    Today the Soviet Union is gone and its corpse is dying on the steppe of Ukraine, the North Koreans are a criminal junta where people eat their family members and sidewalk weeds, and the Chinese - the most successful of the bunch - regularly lose stick fights with demoralized street shitters from darkest India.

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah all this bullshit aside - you ever stop to think that America has been the only country in history, ever, which could have conceivably conquered the planet by force and just decided not to? Like there was a long ass period where the Soviet nuclear program was nothing but a joke, and the chinsects were in even worse shape for even longer. Instead the US and their Commonwealth allies just kinda let it ride. Even gave former enemies/cowards back their countries and made them peers. Bet the Bongs regret that with Germany and France.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's okay anon, they can't into freedom

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      =
      The U.S. did conquer the world, just as a series of protectorates with favorable trade relationships
      Every empire that tried to occupy that much territory has imploded
      I don't understand why the U.S. did not take advantage of the 20th century turmoil to swallow Mexico, though, Mexico has a huge number of mismanaged land resources, is unstable and deleterious as an independent state, and if properly integrated would make an entirely navy+coast guard military structure viable
      Possibly Canada too, but the water wars haven't started yet and Canada is at least a functioning nationstate

Your email address will not be published.