I can’t be the only one who automatically voted US Army Rangers without doubting.
I voted for them as well.
1) Why would only the US Army Rangers be involved?
2) Why would the North Atlantic Treaty Organization get involved? S.Korea is not a member and couldn't invoke Article 5, nor could the US, heck according to the US the US would be unable to invoke Article 5 if Hawaii was attacked per Article 6. It would make more sense if Japan, at el mobilized first with the US given the geography.
3)Is China and Russia giving the DPRK support of any kind?
(08-29-2019, 09:33 AM)Kyng Wrote: [ -> ]I voted for the US Army Rangers, partly because of the reasons Crow gave, and partly because I'm just horribly biased against North Korea from the get-go 
.
Me too! Plus, the sweet summer children never fought a war since ca. 1974. While the Rangers have plenty of experience. This is a case where Deadliest Warrior was ‘right for the wrong reasons.’
Well, in any case, I agree with Lurker that your "Bonus Backstory" scenario would make more sense if the non-NATO allies entered first, simply because they're closer to South Korea. Also, unless China and Russia are fully behind North Korea, I'd just leave NATO out altogether - because, if we have the USA and the rest of NATO and Japan/Australia/New Zealand fighting against North Korea, then it's just going to be a one-sided curbstomp.
(Although, in answer to the question of why only the US Army Rangers would be involved: it appears that this match-up is based on the Deadliest Warrior TV series, which featured hypothetical match-ups between armed forces from different countries - but usually only one branch rather than the entire military)
Yes; It’s intended to be a truer to history take inspired by Deadliest Warrior. They concluded the fight would be near stalemate. I disagree.
The other reason why I question the use of Rangers is that the Rangers are more of a support squad for other US Spec Ops when behind/in enemy lines often are raids and/or airfield seizure where the Green Berets focus is on long term (months to years) operations.
Oh. I thought the Rangers were just elite regular soldiers.
Regardless, I'm pretty sure this is a massive curb-stomp in favor of the Americans.
Given that North Korea gets by on heavily modified Cold War Era equipment, spends more money in their defense budget for missiles than actual training, and haven't fought a real war in ages - I'd go for the more combat ready Rangers with the better load out.
(09-03-2019, 07:17 PM)Azriel Delacroix Wrote: [ -> ]Given that North Korea gets by on heavily modified Cold War Era equipment, spends more money in their defense budget for missiles than actual training, and haven't fought a real war in ages - I'd go for the more combat ready Rangers with the better load out.
Deadliest Warrior got owned for the thousandth time in a row.