Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / HomeFront

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There's a pretty cool timeline here that explains ''some'' of the logistics of how the Korean unification under Kim Jong-Un would happen: http://homefront.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline. Most of it is similar to the rise of Hitler; that is, redirecting peoples' anger from focusing on the North to focusing on the US while also appealing to the pretty strong Korean sense of nationalism. As for the occupation of Japan, presumably most of the lower government infrastructure (law enforcement, public services) would be kept intact, so you wouldn't really need a massive army as long as you had control of the top (of course, running death camps would be pretty difficult, especially when they would appear to be targeted at the entire ethnic group of Japan instead of a hated minority like the Jews). As for the invasion of the US, assuming that the member states of the GKR magically don't mind contributing, say, 5% of their combined population to the military (North Korea at its height had about 6.1% of its population in its military), that would yield a total of 59,001,936 GKR armed forces members. I don't know about the logistics of equipping, training, supplying, and feeding that many soldiers, but in terms of raw manpower, that would be enough to occupy the urban centers of the downtrodden and demoralized West-and-Midwest US.

to:

** There's a pretty cool timeline here that explains ''some'' of the logistics of how the Korean unification under Kim Jong-Un would happen: http://homefront.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline. Most of it is similar to the rise of Hitler; that is, redirecting peoples' anger from focusing on the North to focusing on the US while also appealing to the pretty strong Korean sense of nationalism. As for the occupation of Japan, presumably most of the lower government infrastructure (law enforcement, public services) would be kept intact, so you wouldn't really need a massive army as long as you had control of the top (of course, running death camps would be pretty difficult, especially when they would appear to be targeted at the entire ethnic group of Japan instead of a hated minority like the Jews). As for the invasion of the US, assuming that the member states of the GKR magically don't mind contributing, say, 5% of their combined population to the military (North Korea at its height had about 6.1% of its population in its military), that would yield a total of 59,001,936 GKR armed forces members. I don't know about the logistics of equipping, training, supplying, and feeding that many soldiers, but in terms of raw manpower, that would be enough to occupy the urban centers of the downtrodden and demoralized West-and-Midwest US.US.
* How did the Oasis remain hidden for two years? It's covered by a camouflage net in the middle of a suburb that, if Boone's mention of moving out in the next patrol gap and the flyby of a Nork helicopter is anything to go by, is regularly patrolled. Even if the Resistance did manage to keep it hidden from ground patrols, wouldn't the presence of a camouflage net in the middle of a suburb raise at least some curiosity from air patrols to warrant a report and investigation?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Critical Research Failure is a disambiguation page


*** The [=M16A4=] and the M4 use the exact same magazine, and NATO standardized around STANAG for a reason. Just chalk it up to CriticalResearchFailure.

to:

*** The [=M16A4=] and the M4 use the exact same magazine, and NATO standardized around STANAG for a reason. Just chalk it up to CriticalResearchFailure.Critical Research Failure.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


*** I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been undermined since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.

to:

*** I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been undermined since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot ridiculous but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
IP is now Flame Bait and no first person.


* The IdiotPlot. North Korea pulling off a successful invasion of South Korea? Not going to happen, period. Even if South Korea wasn't capable of defending itself, the entire world would see a North Korea victory as a very, very bad thing. In short, North Korea would either end up utterly defeated, or nukes would be used on South Korea, effectively crippling any unified Korea into poverty, destitution, and cancer. Its capability to invade any other country would be so laughable it's not even funny. And the Korean EMP satellite? If only space programs were that easy--and that's not even counting countries where so much human talent is wasted, education is very poor except for the few chosen elite, and an air of YouHaveFailedMe stifles development. Oh, and apparently Canada and Europe think letting the world go to hell is not their problem whatsoever. Not like there was a world war in the past or anyth--
** I'm going to try to address all of your points. As far as North Korea taking South Korea, that is probably the easiest. Just have China come out in support of North Korea with some propoganda about unification and no one going to mess with North Korea. To be blunt, this is not 1950. Governments are run by wimps (ad hominem much?) that do not stand up to dictators at all. See Iran and and current responses to North Korean nuclear tests for examples. Basically, if North Korea managed to overrun South Korea quickly enough, few people are going to try to reverse it. If China vetoes a UN Security Council resolution against North Korea almost no one is going to act on their own. Only the US probably even has the ability but proably lacks the willpower judging by the fact that people are bothered by 5,000 dead in ten years whereas in WWII America had 400,000 dead in only four years. Beating back North Korea would seem like more trouble than it is worth. In 2012/2013, the memories of Iraq and the proably ongoing fight in Afghanistan make responding seem unlikely.

to:

* The IdiotPlot. North Korea pulling off a successful invasion of South Korea? Not going to happen, period. Even if South Korea wasn't capable of defending itself, the entire world would see a North Korea victory as a very, very bad thing. In short, North Korea would either end up utterly defeated, or nukes would be used on South Korea, effectively crippling any unified Korea into poverty, destitution, and cancer. Its capability to invade any other country would be so laughable it's not even funny. And the Korean EMP satellite? If only space programs were that easy--and that's not even counting countries where so much human talent is wasted, education is very poor except for the few chosen elite, and an air of YouHaveFailedMe stifles development. Oh, and apparently Canada and Europe think letting the world go to hell is not their problem whatsoever. Not like there was a world war in the past or anyth--
** I'm going to try to address all of your points. As far as North Korea taking South Korea, that is probably the easiest. Just have China come out in support of North Korea with some propoganda about unification and no one going to mess with North Korea. To be blunt, this is not 1950. Governments are run by wimps (ad hominem much?) that do not stand up to dictators at all. See Iran and and current responses to North Korean nuclear tests for examples. Basically, if North Korea managed to overrun South Korea quickly enough, few people are going to try to reverse it. If China vetoes a UN Security Council resolution against North Korea almost no one is going to act on their own. Only the US probably even has the ability but proably lacks the willpower judging by the fact that people are bothered by 5,000 dead in ten years whereas in WWII America had 400,000 dead in only four years. Beating back North Korea would seem like more trouble than it is worth. In 2012/2013, the memories of Iraq and the proably ongoing fight in Afghanistan make responding seem unlikely.



*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been undermined since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.

to:

*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been undermined since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.



*** I would like to dispute that China needs the United States more than the US needs China. If the US economy suddenly collapsed China would be hit pretty hard but would still be capable of adjusting. With America giving up more and more of its manufacturing capability a reversed situation would result in a major shortage of manufactured products with countries such as India and Mexico eventually picking up the slack later on unless China pulls America and the rest of the world down with her.
*** If anything, I would say the opposite and your example gives as much. China's in a crippling demographic spiral down, is sort of hitting a wall with what the current system the regime has allowed can accomplish, and is getting undercut by some other rivals. You can't really grow as an economy or country in the long term when your demographics are getting crippled; while the US is tottering under a massive amount of debt that can at least be serviced with competent management (which is not a foregone conclusion, granted...). If anything, it's likely that those countries like India and Mexico picking up the slack would cut into the ability of the Chinese market to be competitive on an international scale.
*** Ehhh, I'm kinda dubious on this, as this sort of assumes that China's going to stay as a purely manufacturing economy, or even that China's just going to rely on selling to the US and EU, instead of just selling to the (huge) domestic market.

to:

*** I would like to dispute that China needs the United States more than the US needs China. If the US economy suddenly collapsed China would be hit pretty hard but would still be capable of adjusting. With America giving up more and more of its manufacturing capability a reversed situation would result in a major shortage of manufactured products with countries such as India and Mexico eventually picking up the slack later on unless China pulls America and the rest of the world down with her.
*** If anything, I would say the opposite and your example gives as much. China's in a crippling demographic spiral down, is sort of hitting a wall with what the current system the regime has allowed can accomplish, and is getting undercut by some other rivals. You can't really grow as an economy or country in the long term when your demographics are getting crippled; while the US is tottering under a massive amount of debt that can at least be serviced with competent management (which is not a foregone conclusion, granted...). If anything, it's likely that those countries like India and Mexico picking up the slack would cut into the ability of the Chinese market to be competitive on an international scale.
*** Ehhh, I'm kinda dubious on this, as this sort of assumes that China's going to stay as a purely manufacturing economy, or even that China's just going to rely on selling to the US and EU, instead of just selling to the (huge) domestic market.



* Hoo boy, where to begin? I'm less than two hours into this game and already the IdiotPlot is grating on me so badly it's difficult to continue playing. So as not to stretch this out into a page-long rant, let's limit it to the beginning - the very start of the very first mission. Specifically, the resistance's plan to rescue you, which involves ''ramming the bus you are on at high speed with another vehicle''. The impact sends the vehicle flying and kills literally everyone else on board - indeed, it seems as though the only reason you survive is because you're the protagonist; you land head-first, which would have broken your neck in real life. There is really no way the plan could have possibly gone ''well''; what if you had been killed like everyone else? What if the only person to survive was one of the other people on the bus? Literally their entire massive plan would have been utterly ruined at the outset, solely because they're apparently incapable of understanding the concept that being inside a vehicle as it is wrecked tends to be dangerous. It would have been far safer to just attack the bus on foot while it was stationary - they end up having to fight their way through what seems to be the entire Korean army anyway, so it's not like it would have made much of a difference. Hell, they might not have inadvertently killed a half-dozen innocent civilians, either, which is exactly what they did with their original plan.
** There were only two civilians on there, and I think the crash was basically to show that the Resistance [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized isn't exactly made up of White Knights]]. Rhianna also [[LampshadeHanging lampshades]] the fact that the protagonist is still alive after the crash, and it seems like it was Connor who got the idea of ramming the bus with a car, and considering how Connor is a HotBlooded SociopathicHero, it's not surprising.

to:

* Hoo boy, where to begin? I'm less than two hours into this game and already the IdiotPlot is grating on me so badly it's difficult to continue playing. So as not to stretch this out into a page-long rant, let's limit it to the beginning - the The very start of the very first mission. Specifically, the resistance's plan to rescue you, which involves ''ramming the bus you are on at high speed with another vehicle''. The impact sends the vehicle flying and kills literally everyone else on board - indeed, it seems as though the only reason you survive is because you're the protagonist; you land head-first, which would have broken your neck in real life. There is really no way the plan could have possibly gone ''well''; what if you had been killed like everyone else? What if the only person to survive was one of the other people on the bus? Literally their entire massive plan would have been utterly ruined at the outset, solely because they're apparently incapable of understanding the concept that being inside a vehicle as it is wrecked tends to be dangerous. It would have been far safer to just attack the bus on foot while it was stationary - they end up having to fight their way through what seems to be the entire Korean army anyway, so it's not like it would have made much of a difference. Hell, they might not have inadvertently killed a half-dozen innocent civilians, either, which is exactly what they did with their original plan.
** There were only two civilians on there, and I think the crash was basically to show that the Resistance [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized isn't exactly made up of White Knights]]. Rhianna also [[LampshadeHanging lampshades]] the fact that the protagonist is still alive after the crash, and it seems like it was Connor who got the idea of ramming the bus with a car, and considering how Connor is a HotBlooded SociopathicHero, it's not surprising.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Wiki/ namespace clean up.


*** Hell, he doesn't have to be a pilot. It's enough for him to have a bit of common knowledge or to read Wiki/TVTropes or play ego shooters. And you'd expect somebody who's able to mow down hundreds of trained enemy soldiers with ease to know such facts.

to:

*** Hell, he doesn't have to be a pilot. It's enough for him to have a bit of common knowledge or to read Wiki/TVTropes Website/TVTropes or play ego shooters. And you'd expect somebody who's able to mow down hundreds of trained enemy soldiers with ease to know such facts.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Undermined By Reality has been cut.


*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.

to:

*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality undermined since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible to a GodModeSue-ized North Korea and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.

to:

*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible to a GodModeSue-ized North Korea and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other VillainSue parts, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible to a GodModeSue-ized North Korea and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.

to:

*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other VillainSue parts, other, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible to a GodModeSue-ized North Korea and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** Hell, he doesn't have to be a pilot. It's enough for him to have a bit of common knowledge or to read TVtropes or play ego shooters. And you'd expect somebody who's able to mow down hundreds of trained enemy soldiers with ease to know such facts.

to:

*** Hell, he doesn't have to be a pilot. It's enough for him to have a bit of common knowledge or to read TVtropes Wiki/TVTropes or play ego shooters. And you'd expect somebody who's able to mow down hundreds of trained enemy soldiers with ease to know such facts.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** I'm going to try to address all of your points. As far as North Korea taking South Korea, that is probably the easiest. Just have China come out in support of North Korea with some propoganda about unification and no one going to mess with North Korea. To be blunt, this is not 1950. Governments are run by wimps that do not stand up to dictators at all. See Iran and and current responses to North Korean nuclear tests for examples. Basically, if North Korea managed to overrun South Korea quickly enough, few people are going to try to reverse it. If China vetoes a UN Security Council resolution against North Korea almost no one is going to act on their own. Only the US probably even has the ability but proably lacks the willpower judging by the fact that people are bothered by 5,000 dead in ten years whereas in WWII America had 400,000 dead in only four years. Beating back North Korea would seem like more trouble than it is worth. In 2012/2013, the memories of Iraq and the proably ongoing fight in Afghanistan make responding seem unlikely.
** Concerning the ability to invade another country, their ability to reduce South Korea to rubble is rather easy. Invading other countries is not that hard either if you follow the WMG that China is bankrolling North Korea, leaving China's reputation untarnished and putting China in a very good position to be the ranking superpower. Aren't proxies wonderful? Why is it so hard to believe that the North Korean military could not be built up to be a much more high-tech force? You're confusing right now with what could happen ten to fifteen years later. For example, America went from having an army of 200,000 to a military composed of 10.5 million servicemen and women in only a few years. With some help from China and some R&D of captured South Korean and presumably U.S. equipment from the invasion of South Korea, upgrades are not impossible. Captured equipment from Japan (I think that was the next target) would also be helpful.

to:

** I'm going to try to address all of your points. As far as North Korea taking South Korea, that is probably the easiest. Just have China come out in support of North Korea with some propoganda about unification and no one going to mess with North Korea. To be blunt, this is not 1950. Governments are run by wimps (ad hominem much?) that do not stand up to dictators at all. See Iran and and current responses to North Korean nuclear tests for examples. Basically, if North Korea managed to overrun South Korea quickly enough, few people are going to try to reverse it. If China vetoes a UN Security Council resolution against North Korea almost no one is going to act on their own. Only the US probably even has the ability but proably lacks the willpower judging by the fact that people are bothered by 5,000 dead in ten years whereas in WWII America had 400,000 dead in only four years. Beating back North Korea would seem like more trouble than it is worth. In 2012/2013, the memories of Iraq and the proably ongoing fight in Afghanistan make responding seem unlikely.
** Concerning the ability to invade another country, their ability to reduce South Korea to rubble is rather easy. Invading other countries is not that hard either if you follow the WMG that China is bankrolling North Korea, leaving China's reputation untarnished and putting China in a very good position to be the ranking superpower. Aren't proxies wonderful? Why is it so hard to believe that the North Korean military could not be built up to be a much more high-tech force? You're confusing right now with what could happen ten to fifteen years later. For example, America went from having an army of 200,000 to a military composed of 10.5 million servicemen and women in only a few years. (Yes and the U.S. was already any economic superpower not an impoverished hermit kingdom.) With some help from China and some R&D of captured South Korean and presumably U.S. equipment from the invasion of South Korea, upgrades are not impossible. Captured equipment from Japan (I think that was the next target) would also be helpful.



**** Ok, to start off, the main lie about the rationale for the Iraq invasion was that THERE WAS an overarching lie. Pretty much every single point rattled off in the justification was broadly proven to be true, and only *one* of them as per the UN ceasefire would have dejure legalized another war against Saddam. That, and Saddam's alliance with the "real perpetrators of 9/11" and countless other actions would have justified (in principle if not in actuality, where other concerns would have to be weighed) action agianst him. Naturally, the justifications for a war are more complicated than whether the schematics of a decades-old UN-backed agreement are violated, and the justifications for war were certainly stacked beyond what was reasonably concealable by the evidence and what turned out to be true, but the fact of the matter is that the population has broadly gotten sick of Iraq and even Afghanistan-which you posit as the just war- without an underlying fatal weakness in the stated moral justifications for it, which further highlights the question of whether the US would be willing to sustain a prolonged conventional war against a major military power with the potential backing of a superpower more or less in isolation. Also, you highly overestimate how much the Chinese would care about being implicated unofficially in the matter. Even if China has utterly imploded on itself to a far greater degree than we believe in the gap between RL and Homefront, it would at worst be a situation like the Warlord era of a bunch of semi-feudal commanders with enough firepower to make any open war intervention to simply prove a point highly costly for anybody save those committed to actually carving out Empire there (like the Japanese were). And as for the rationale that the Chinese would not want the US gone due to the economics issue, that's severely overestimating the good will the Chinese regime has for the West: to one degree or another, the Chinese have- and not always unjustly- viewed themselves as being the prime power on the world, and to some degree one of the great competitors for global primacy, and since they indisputably lost that position to the West pretty much every Chinese government regardless of ideology or way has sough to overturn this (some far less horrifically than others, natch, compare Mao to-say- Sun Yat Sen, who primarily sought to do so peacefully through what we'd call good old fashioned national competition), but the fact remains that the CCP isn't our friend *by choice*, and in the long run their ideology demands that they must supplant the West as the dominant world power or fall in the attempt. Both of these would combine to make the Chinese a button *nobody* would want to push just yet. If the West is fighting tooth and nail with their sock puppets the DPRK and have been kicked all the way the *NORTH AMERICA* by them, how the hell would bringing the *Chinese* into the war openly help them? If anything, having that happen prematurely might well spell the final doom of anybody that actually wants to beat Kim Jong Un and his masters. Which is why regardless of how much flow there is between the PRC and the GKR, nobody would care to intervene *Yet*, save perhaps by noting it and filing it away for future reference: for the same reason that when the Western Allies went to war against Nazi Germany in 1939, they *didn't* go to war with the USSR: they couldn't afford to fight both at once.

to:

**** Ok, to start off, the main lie about the rationale for the Iraq invasion was that THERE WAS an overarching lie. Pretty much every single point rattled off in the justification was broadly proven to be true, and only *one* of them as per the UN ceasefire would have dejure legalized another war against Saddam. That, and Saddam's alliance with the "real perpetrators of 9/11" ( "real perpetrators?" And just who pray tell were these "real" perpetrators? The Illuminati?) and countless other actions would have justified (in principle if not in actuality, where other concerns would have to be weighed) action agianst him. Naturally, the justifications for a war are more complicated than whether the schematics of a decades-old UN-backed agreement are violated, and the justifications for war were certainly stacked beyond what was reasonably concealable by the evidence and what turned out to be true, but the fact of the matter is that the population has broadly gotten sick of Iraq and even Afghanistan-which you posit as the just war- without an underlying fatal weakness in the stated moral justifications for it, which further highlights the question of whether the US would be willing to sustain a prolonged conventional war against a major military power with the potential backing of a superpower more or less in isolation. (You seem to overlook the fact that we have a military alliance w/The Republic of Korea which includes U.S. troops stationed in South Korea. So we would automatically be at war if the North invaded.) Also, you highly overestimate how much the Chinese would care about being implicated unofficially in the matter. Even if China has utterly imploded on itself to a far greater degree than we believe in the gap between RL and Homefront, it would at worst be a situation like the Warlord era of a bunch of semi-feudal commanders with enough firepower to make any open war intervention to simply prove a point highly costly for anybody save those committed to actually carving out Empire there (like the Japanese were). And as for the rationale that the Chinese would not want the US gone due to the economics issue, that's severely overestimating the good will the Chinese regime has for the West: to one degree or another, the Chinese have- and not always unjustly- viewed themselves as being the prime power on the world, and to some degree one of the great competitors for global primacy, and since they indisputably lost that position to the West pretty much every Chinese government regardless of ideology or way has sough to overturn this (some far less horrifically than others, natch, compare Mao to-say- Sun Yat Sen, who primarily sought to do so peacefully through what we'd call good old fashioned national competition), but the fact remains that the CCP isn't our friend *by choice*, and in the long run their ideology demands that they must supplant the West as the dominant world power or fall in the attempt. Both of these would combine to make the Chinese a button *nobody* would want to push just yet. If the West is fighting tooth and nail with their sock puppets the DPRK and have been kicked all the way the *NORTH AMERICA* by them, how the hell would bringing the *Chinese* into the war openly help them? If anything, having that happen prematurely might well spell the final doom of anybody that actually wants to beat Kim Jong Un and his masters. Which is why regardless of how much flow there is between the PRC and the GKR, nobody would care to intervene *Yet*, save perhaps by noting it and filing it away for future reference: for the same reason that when the Western Allies went to war against Nazi Germany in 1939, they *didn't* go to war with the USSR: they couldn't afford to fight both at once.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*****Ehhh, I'm kinda dubious on this, as this sort of assumes that China's going to stay as a purely manufacturing economy, or even that China's just going to rely on selling to the US and EU, instead of just selling to the (huge) domestic market.
** Here's a baffling addition: How in God's name did North Korea get away with annexing ''Taiwan'' without a furious China? Whatever economic straights the PRC is in, there is absolutely no way North Korea is getting away with that without the Chinese Navy getting involved. China considers Taiwan part of China, and if any country challenges this, then China will do everything in its power to mark Taiwan as their territory. Plus, I mean, if China really is slumping so hard, wouldn't a wartime economy both help them economically and ensure a stabilizing spike in nationalism?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


**** Rhianna still kills the CrazySurvivalists anyways. We don't really see the planning stages, but it's assumed that she voiced objections to the ramming plan as well before being shown that it's the only way, and she decided to [[IDidWhatIHadToDo do what she had to do]].

to:

**** Rhianna still kills the CrazySurvivalists {{Crazy Survivalist}}s anyways. We don't really see the planning stages, but it's assumed that she voiced objections to the ramming plan as well before being shown that it's the only way, and she decided to [[IDidWhatIHadToDo do what she had to do]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Seven Times!


* Jacobs was a pilot in the Marine Corps but can't pickup magazines from an M4 to use with an M16A4, and vice versa.

to:

* Jacobs was a pilot in the Marine Corps but can't pickup magazines from an M4 to use with an M16A4, [=M16A4=], and vice versa.



*** The Marines emphasize marksmanship, the motto being that "every Marine is a rifleman first". He would have been trained, and had to qualify annually, with an M16A4 unless he's old enough to have served before then (in which he case he would have used an M16A2 which is almost the exact same rifle). He should have at least a passing familiarity with the M4 and should know that the magazines used by the M4 and the M16 are the exact same magazines. Even looking at the guns should tell him that.

to:

*** The Marines emphasize marksmanship, the motto being that "every Marine is a rifleman first". He would have been trained, and had to qualify annually, with an M16A4 [=M16A4=] unless he's old enough to have served before then (in which he case he would have used an M16A2 [=M16A2=] which is almost the exact same rifle). He should have at least a passing familiarity with the M4 and should know that the magazines used by the M4 and the M16 are the exact same magazines. Even looking at the guns should tell him that.



** He's kinda done being in the corps. Hence why he's living in an occupied city. So perhaps his shooting skills are rusty, and since he has no access to the internet due to the EMP, he's not entirely sure if M4 mags fit into an M16A4 and vice versa, simply because he forgot.
*** That doesn't really fly. It's not that M4 mags fit in M16s. It's that they are, literally, the exact same magazine using the exact same ammunition. And as a Marine, presumably in the 2020s or post-2011, unless he's older than we're led to believe, he would have been very familiar with the M16A4 and would have - at the absolute least - a passing familiarity with the M4.
**** I think you have it backwards. The M16A4 is being phased out of the Marine Corps in favor of the M4 so he may have had very little experience with the M16. He's also spending most of his time around guns being shot at for the first time in a while, so he might be panicking and just not thinking clearly.
**** The M16A4 and the M4 use the exact same magazine, and NATO standardized around STANAG for a reason. Just chalk it up to CriticalResearchFailure.

to:

** He's kinda done being in the corps. Hence why he's living in an occupied city. So perhaps his shooting skills are rusty, and since he has no access to the internet due to the EMP, he's not entirely sure if M4 mags fit into an M16A4 [=M16A4=] and vice versa, simply because he forgot.
*** That doesn't really fly. It's not that M4 mags fit in M16s. It's that they are, literally, the exact same magazine using the exact same ammunition. And as a Marine, presumably in the 2020s or post-2011, unless he's older than we're led to believe, he would have been very familiar with the M16A4 [=M16A4=] and would have - at the absolute least - a passing familiarity with the M4.
**** I think you have it backwards. The M16A4 [=M16A4=] is being phased out of the Marine Corps in favor of the M4 so he may have had very little experience with the M16. He's also spending most of his time around guns being shot at for the first time in a while, so he might be panicking and just not thinking clearly.
**** The M16A4 [=M16A4=] and the M4 use the exact same magazine, and NATO standardized around STANAG for a reason. Just chalk it up to CriticalResearchFailure.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

**** If anything, I would say the opposite and your example gives as much. China's in a crippling demographic spiral down, is sort of hitting a wall with what the current system the regime has allowed can accomplish, and is getting undercut by some other rivals. You can't really grow as an economy or country in the long term when your demographics are getting crippled; while the US is tottering under a massive amount of debt that can at least be serviced with competent management (which is not a foregone conclusion, granted...). If anything, it's likely that those countries like India and Mexico picking up the slack would cut into the ability of the Chinese market to be competitive on an international scale.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

**** It doesn't have to be a critical research failure, it's a gameplay conceit. The only reason he can't do this is so that every weapon has its own, unique ammo supply. Many shooters do this so that you're constantly swapping weapons, never just sticking with one weapon the whole time and Homefront is no different. That's the simplest reason that this was done. Call it GameplayandStorySegregation or whatever else you like but it was very clearly done on purpose to anyone who knows anything about FPS game design.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There's a pretty cool timeline here that explains ''some'' of the logistics of how the Korean unification under Kim Jong-Un would happen: http://homefront.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline. Most of it is similar to the rise of Hitler; that is, redirecting peoples' anger from focusing on the North to focusing on the US while also appealing to the pretty strong Korean sense of nationalism. As for the occupation of Japan, presumably most of the lower government infrastructure (law enforcement, public services) would be kept intact, so you wouldn't really need a massive army as long as you had control of the top (of course, running death camps would be pretty difficult, especially when they would appear to be targeted at the entire ethnic group of Japan instead of a hated minority like the Jews). As for the invasion of the US, assuming that the member states of the GKR all contribute 5% of their population to the military (North Korea at its height had about 6.1% of its population in its military), that would yield a total of 59,001,936 GKR armed forces members. I don't know about the logistics of equipping, training, supplying, and feeding that many soldiers, but in terms of raw manpower, that would be enough to occupy the urban centers of the downtrodden and demoralized West-and-Midwest US.

to:

** There's a pretty cool timeline here that explains ''some'' of the logistics of how the Korean unification under Kim Jong-Un would happen: http://homefront.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline. Most of it is similar to the rise of Hitler; that is, redirecting peoples' anger from focusing on the North to focusing on the US while also appealing to the pretty strong Korean sense of nationalism. As for the occupation of Japan, presumably most of the lower government infrastructure (law enforcement, public services) would be kept intact, so you wouldn't really need a massive army as long as you had control of the top (of course, running death camps would be pretty difficult, especially when they would appear to be targeted at the entire ethnic group of Japan instead of a hated minority like the Jews). As for the invasion of the US, assuming that the member states of the GKR all contribute magically don't mind contributing, say, 5% of their combined population to the military (North Korea at its height had about 6.1% of its population in its military), that would yield a total of 59,001,936 GKR armed forces members. I don't know about the logistics of equipping, training, supplying, and feeding that many soldiers, but in terms of raw manpower, that would be enough to occupy the urban centers of the downtrodden and demoralized West-and-Midwest US.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Heres a logistical puzzler for you, where the hell are the North Koreans even getting an army big enough to invade the US, let alone take as much territory as they have? A 2011 estimate puts their population at 24,554,000, current estimates put their military at 1.21 million. I can maybe see that taking South Korea (and even if its an allegedly peaceful reunification, given the habits of the North Korean soldiers in the game and their government's real world treatment of actual North Korean citizens I find it unlikely that a peaceful reunification would last very long before South Koreans who prefer not starving start rebelling, thus necessitating a "peace keeping force"). South Korea has a population of 50,004,441 more than double that of the North. The north is going to need a hell of a lot of soldiers to "pacify" that many people, many of which likely didn't want them their in the first place, especially the South Korean military which had 650,000 troops as of 2011. Now personally I think that such a reunification of the Koreas would go about as well as the an invasion of Afghanistan, especially once North Korea got down to the whole death camp business, but for the sake of argument lets say everything goes really smoothly for them to set them up for the invasion of Japan. Japan has a population of 126,659,683. Again, this is at least semi plausible provided you've been drinking heavily enough to ignore all factors other than man power. Ok so I can buy the reunification of South Korea, and the conquest of Japan on a long enough timeline, my question then is where the hell did they get enough troops to take half the US? Even if they significantly bolstered their army through conscription and brainwashing the people they conquered into joining, that still should be enough for them to barely have enough soldiers to take Oregon before they have assign an a single platoon to each individual state to commit atrocities and make america a workers paradise or whatever they're goal is besides strangling as many puppies as possible.

to:

* Heres a logistical puzzler for you, where the hell are the North Koreans even getting an army big enough to invade the US, let alone take as much territory as they have? A 2011 estimate puts their population at 24,554,000, current estimates put their military at 1.21 million. I can maybe see that taking South Korea (and even if its an allegedly peaceful reunification, given the habits of the North Korean soldiers in the game and their government's real world treatment of actual North Korean citizens I find it unlikely that a peaceful reunification would last very long before South Koreans who prefer not starving start rebelling, thus necessitating a "peace keeping force"). South Korea has a population of 50,004,441 more than double that of the North. The north is going to need a hell of a lot of soldiers to "pacify" that many people, many of which likely didn't want them their in the first place, especially the South Korean military which had 650,000 troops as of 2011. Now personally I think that such a reunification of the Koreas would go about as well as the an invasion of Afghanistan, especially once North Korea got down to the whole death camp business, but for the sake of argument lets say everything goes really smoothly for them to set them up for the invasion of Japan. Japan has a population of 126,659,683. Again, this is at least semi plausible provided you've been drinking heavily enough to ignore all factors other than man power. Ok so I can buy the reunification of South Korea, and the conquest of Japan on a long enough timeline, my question then is where the hell did they get enough troops to take half the US? Even if they significantly bolstered their army through conscription and brainwashing the people they conquered into joining, that still should be enough for them to barely have enough soldiers to take Oregon before they have assign an a single platoon to each individual state to commit atrocities and make america a workers paradise or whatever they're goal is besides strangling as many puppies as possible.possible.
**There's a pretty cool timeline here that explains ''some'' of the logistics of how the Korean unification under Kim Jong-Un would happen: http://homefront.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline. Most of it is similar to the rise of Hitler; that is, redirecting peoples' anger from focusing on the North to focusing on the US while also appealing to the pretty strong Korean sense of nationalism. As for the occupation of Japan, presumably most of the lower government infrastructure (law enforcement, public services) would be kept intact, so you wouldn't really need a massive army as long as you had control of the top (of course, running death camps would be pretty difficult, especially when they would appear to be targeted at the entire ethnic group of Japan instead of a hated minority like the Jews). As for the invasion of the US, assuming that the member states of the GKR all contribute 5% of their population to the military (North Korea at its height had about 6.1% of its population in its military), that would yield a total of 59,001,936 GKR armed forces members. I don't know about the logistics of equipping, training, supplying, and feeding that many soldiers, but in terms of raw manpower, that would be enough to occupy the urban centers of the downtrodden and demoralized West-and-Midwest US.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** I would like to dispute that China needs the United States more than the US needs China. If the US economy suddenly collapsed China would be hit pretty hard but would still be capable of adjusting. With America giving up more and more of its manufacturing capability a reversed situation would result in a major shortage of manufactured products with countries such as India and Mexico eventually picking up the slack later on unless China pulls America and the rest of the world down with her.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Maybe he tried it off-camera, but Connor yelled at him for not using the right clips or something. Connor's nuts, maybe he has everyone scared.

to:

** Maybe he tried it off-camera, but Connor yelled at him for not using the right clips or something. Connor's nuts, maybe he has everyone scared.scared.
* Heres a logistical puzzler for you, where the hell are the North Koreans even getting an army big enough to invade the US, let alone take as much territory as they have? A 2011 estimate puts their population at 24,554,000, current estimates put their military at 1.21 million. I can maybe see that taking South Korea (and even if its an allegedly peaceful reunification, given the habits of the North Korean soldiers in the game and their government's real world treatment of actual North Korean citizens I find it unlikely that a peaceful reunification would last very long before South Koreans who prefer not starving start rebelling, thus necessitating a "peace keeping force"). South Korea has a population of 50,004,441 more than double that of the North. The north is going to need a hell of a lot of soldiers to "pacify" that many people, many of which likely didn't want them their in the first place, especially the South Korean military which had 650,000 troops as of 2011. Now personally I think that such a reunification of the Koreas would go about as well as the an invasion of Afghanistan, especially once North Korea got down to the whole death camp business, but for the sake of argument lets say everything goes really smoothly for them to set them up for the invasion of Japan. Japan has a population of 126,659,683. Again, this is at least semi plausible provided you've been drinking heavily enough to ignore all factors other than man power. Ok so I can buy the reunification of South Korea, and the conquest of Japan on a long enough timeline, my question then is where the hell did they get enough troops to take half the US? Even if they significantly bolstered their army through conscription and brainwashing the people they conquered into joining, that still should be enough for them to barely have enough soldiers to take Oregon before they have assign an a single platoon to each individual state to commit atrocities and make america a workers paradise or whatever they're goal is besides strangling as many puppies as possible.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** There were only two civilians on there, and I think the crash was basically to show that the Resistance [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized isn't exactly made up of White Knights]]. Rhianna also [[LampshadeHanging lampshades]] the fact that the protagonist is still alive after the crash, and it seems like it was Connor who got the idea of ramming the bus with a car, and considering how Connor is a HotBlooded HeroicSociopath, it's not surprising.

to:

** There were only two civilians on there, and I think the crash was basically to show that the Resistance [[TheRevolutionWillNotBeCivilized isn't exactly made up of White Knights]]. Rhianna also [[LampshadeHanging lampshades]] the fact that the protagonist is still alive after the crash, and it seems like it was Connor who got the idea of ramming the bus with a car, and considering how Connor is a HotBlooded HeroicSociopath, SociopathicHero, it's not surprising.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Another question is how on earth they even knew Jacobs - whom they apparently were looking at specifically because he was a pilot with combat experience and they knew where he was - was going to be on that bus. If they were watching Jacobs's apartment so they could contact him, how did they a) get a vehicle suitable for ramming a freaking bus off the road and b) get ahead of said bus despite not necessarily knowing what route it would take?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** By and large I agree, however for the sake of the argument I'll try and break down the points. A) This is one of those "Da Eff??" parts of the game's story, but it's worth noting that while North Korea is terminally dependent on a LOT, it is far less interconnected with the rest of the world than the average, meaning that if it could somehow get its' basic needs met, it might endure. Of course, meeting those basic needs would be trouble enough.... B) Correction: the GOVERNMENT and the older generations are taking the harder line. The younger generations of South Korea are actually increasingly Dovish and basically do not see North Korea as a problem or a threat by and large. Of course, I don't have to tell anyone here how monstrously stupid this is, but that doesn't change how that's how they roll. This doesn't explain the miraculous way Kim Jong Un is able to do it singlehandedly of course, but it helps show that South Korea isn't has vigilant as it should be. C) This point's been UnderminedByReality since that is more or less *exactly* what Kim Jong Un has spent the opening parts of his reign doing, and by all accounts he has managed to manhandle the generals putting up the sternest resistance to his rule. If anything, that bit of the game's plot can be taken as downright prophetic; it doesn't explain away the other VillainSue parts, but that much is good to go. D: Agreed, that's another major problem with it. However, if I had to hazard a guess, while the Japanese certainly would re-militarize, they'd be far more internally divided due to the traditional post-war anti-militarism and are in the middle of a demographic implosion. Couple that with the fact that the North has far better intelligence on Japan in general- thanks to organizations like Chongryon- than on vice-versa. It'd still be a vastly harder fight worth looking into than its' treatment in the 'verse, but it's not entirely impossible to a GodModeSue-ized North Korea and the North Koreans would simply be the more numerous and more ruthless. E) Agreed; besides the fact that they have historically been aligned with Pyongyang and might not be the most obvious targets in the world because of that. In contrast, the US has been foursquare against the Kim Dynasty since it was born, and would certainly be regarded as a threat. F) Yes, you've got me there about it there, however, at the very least there would be considerable benefits to even an evacuated invasion in hopefully devastating the US home front and pre-empting retaliation for the forseeable future...at least in theory. In practice it almost certainly would be a disaster, but I don't even want to know how the North Koreans came up with their plan. They just *might* be hedging their bets on a strike on the US neutralizing their greatest adversary for the time it takes to consolidate the conquests. G) Agreed, no qualification. H) Which was why the US totally seized the opportunity to enter into war with Japan in 1937, and joined the Western Allies in 1939 from the onset, right? In reality, adventurism like that is just *one* strategy to cope with downturn like that, and history indicates that the US tends to turn inwards when its' in the midst of economic and resource troubles. Overall? I agree it's VERY much an IdiotPlot but someone has to play Devil's Advocate, particularly since individual parts hold up to scrutiny quite well.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

**** The M16A4 and the M4 use the exact same magazine, and NATO standardized around STANAG for a reason. Just chalk it up to CriticalResearchFailure.

Top