North Korea conflict

[Anchorman]

Any N Korea attack would be suicide, so on that basis I doubt they will do anything more than their semiannual beating of their chest. To be clear, they would inflict massive damage on South Korea by virtue of Seoul's proximity to the DMZ and their military's size, but in the end there is simply no way they'd be victorious.

If there was a conflict, my guess is it would be limited in nature. KJU may test the waters, but he doesn't want to lose control. Nor does the US or China want a large conflict, its economic impact, and to have to deal with a shattered N Korea.

 

[BobD]

Like GH90, I don't think KJU will do anything, but if he did.... wouldn't be shocked if China dropped the first round of bombs on NK. The last thing China wants is a ton of fall out blowing North. Just a shame that this PoS cult of personality nutbag endangers so many people, including his own. Here's to hoping some rational NKorean takes him out before anything happens.

Also China doesn't want the world's most powerful military directly across the border from it dismantling a former ally.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Guys. They don't have to nuke anyone.

They can easily kill millions of people in Seoul. N.K. has thousands of artillery pieces in range of Seoul. In a war, they could easily fire thousands upon thousands of rounds into the city, killing millions, before we could stop them.

But an attack on Seoul wouldn't make as much sense as an attack on Japan. An attack on Japan that were to cause massive damage (e.g. a nuke or a slew of rockets) would cause immediate reactions from the Japanese...and Japanese troops on the Korean peninsula is basically unacceptable to the South Koreans. It would get interesting.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

But an attack on Seoul wouldn't make as much sense as an attack on Japan. An attack on Japan that were to cause massive damage (e.g. a nuke or a slew of rockets) would cause immediate reactions from the Japanese...and Japanese troops on the Korean peninsula is basically unacceptable to the South Koreans. It would get interesting.

I don't think Japanese Troops would be part of a response plan, even if Japan herself were attacked. Sure, they'd want to spearhead a response, but the US and China (not to mention the South Koreans, largely because you already did) would never allow that. They would have to be content with media coverage extolling the strength of the US-Japanese military alliance and that US ships and aircraft stationed in Japan are representing them in the conflict. Maybe we let them have some air combat missions or fire a cruise missle or two from the Arleigh Burke Class guided missile destroyers we sold them, but no troops. My 2c.

 

[Irish YJ]

Also China doesn't want the world's most powerful military directly across the border from it dismantling a former ally.

Exacary.
Nor do they want the US "rebuilding" the place for years and years and years and years and year... and a couple more years.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I don't think Japanese Troops would be part of a response plan, even if Japan herself were attacked. Sure, they'd want to spearhead a response, but the US and China (not to mention the South Koreans, largely because you already did) would never allow that. They would have to be content with media coverage extolling the strength of the US-Japanese military alliance and that US ships and aircraft stationed in Japan are representing them in the conflict. Maybe we let them have some air combat missions or fire a cruise missle or two from the Arleigh Burke Class destroyers we sold them, but no troops. My 2c.

That'd be quite the sell to the population is 100k or a million die overnight.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

That'd be quite the sell to the population is 100k or a million die overnight.

Don't have to sell it to the population. This isn't a kissing booth. We let them drop some bombs and fire some missiles. Give them media coverage of smart munitions blowing up North Korean military installations. Think CNN in the United States circa 1990-1991.

Hard to demand to be the hang-man when your attacker is being bombed into the stone age by your allies.

 

[BobD]

But an attack on Seoul wouldn't make as much sense as an attack on Japan. An attack on Japan that were to cause massive damage (e.g. a nuke or a slew of rockets) would cause immediate reactions from the Japanese...and Japanese troops on the Korean peninsula is basically unacceptable to the South Koreans. It would get interesting.

It would be the US attacking for Japan. The Japanese only have a small protection force that only participates in UN actions on a very limited basis.

The don't have a real military.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Exacary.
Nor do they want the US "rebuilding" the place for years and years and years and years and year... and a couple more years.

haha agreed. It's not hard to see China hating that basically a NATO-like alliance will exist between Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, Taiwan, and India will exist to counter their hegemony. Things are going to get more interesting before they get less interesting, that's for sure.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

It would be the US attacking for Japan. The Japanese only have a small protection force that only participates in UN actions on a very limited basis.

Exactly. We'd let them fire some cruise missiles and drop some bombs for footage for domestic consumption, but all the heavy lifting would be done by US forces. 7th Fleet, where you at?

 

[Buster Bluth]

It would be the US attacking for Japan. The Japanese only have a small protection force that only participates in UN actions on a very limited basis.

They have 300,000 in their military. It's for "self-protection" sure, but it's moot because of the political repercussions. Simply saying, attacking Japan makes more sense for North Korea.

 

[Irish YJ]

It would be the US attacking for Japan. The Japanese only have a small protection force that only participates in UN actions on a very limited basis.

The don't have a real military.

Japan's ranks in the mid 20s in terms of active military. Actually larger than the UK, Germany, etc..

Edit - commenting purely on size, not might.

 

[BobD]

Japan's Basic Policy for National Defense stipulates the following policies:[18]
Maintaining an exclusive defense-oriented policy.
To avoid becoming a major military power that might pose a threat to the world.
Refraining from the development of nuclear weapons, and to refuse to allow nuclear weapons inside Japanese territory. (Three Non-Nuclear Principles)
Ensuring civilian control of the military.
Maintaining security arrangements with the United States.
Building up defensive capabilities within moderate limits.
Strict limits on arms exports.(Three Principles on Arms Exports)

 

[Rack Em]

"Reverend"...

HCTI is right about Greyhammer being right!

 

[Andy in Sactown]

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) presently has four Kongō-class destroyers (Japanese export version of United State's Arleigh Burke Class (Flight I)) and two Atago-class destroyers (Flight II) that serve primarily as an anti-ballistic missile defense platform to protect against North Korean missile attacks. Notably, they lack the Tomahawk Cruise Missile System, due to treaty limitations, which makes them purely maritime/coastal defense and anti-submarine warfare vessels.

It would be an interesting Aegis v. Kim's PS3 Guidance System match-up.

As a Navy man, I'm more concerned about those pesky diesel-electric submarines China and Russia have been selling like hot cakes.

Great point about artillery aimed at Seoul. No missile defense system for getting peppered..

7th Fleet has this...

 

[greyhammer90]

"Reverend"...

I clearly stated what needed to be said!

 

[BobD]

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) presently has four Kongō-class destroyers (Japanese export version of United State's Arleigh Burke Class (Flight I)) and two Atago-class destroyers (Flight II) that serve primarily as an anti-ballistic missile defense platform to protect against North Korean missile attacks. Notably, they lack the Tomahawk Cruise Missile System, due to treaty limitations, which makes them purely maritime/coastal defense and anti-submarine warfare vessels.

It would be an interesting Aegis v. Kim's PS3 Guidance System match-up.

As a Navy man, I'm more concerned about those pesky diesel-electric submarines China and Russia have been selling like hot cakes.

Great point about artillery aimed at Seoul. No missile defense system for getting peppered..

7th Fleet has this...

I thought the Mexican drug cartels were buying all those subs?

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

I clearly stated what needed to be said!

Authentic frontier jibberish....

 

[Irish YJ]

I thought the Mexican drug cartels were buying all those subs?

Waaaayyyy tooooo low tech for the cartels. The roll with much more sophistication these days.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

Waaaayyyy tooooo low tech for the cartels. The roll with much more sophistication these days.

Tramps and hookers is where it's at...

 

[Andy in Sactown]

North Korean Military: The Hardware

North Korean Military: The Hardware

TL;DR Version: They aint got **** but some rusty old soviet cold war trash and domestic and Chinese knockoffs of aforementioned trash. Also a bunch of little dudes they're trying to backup by building missiles and trying to get nuclear on our asses. Probably cray cray, but certainly trippin'.


I was curious what North Korea was really working with in terms of hardware. I'm usually up on the new stuff the big boys are playing with, but North Korea was always (in my mind) categorized as, **** load of soldiers on the other side of a mine field, lots of sabre rattling and some old MiG's.. Here's what I found:

Korean People's Army Ground Force: Couple million little dudes with their domestic versions of Soviet AK-47's and AK-74's. 4000-4500 Tanks, mostly old Soviet T-55 and T-62's and their local knockoffs/derivatives. Or as we like to call them over here, large metal coffins (just ask the Iraqis).

Korean People's Army Naval Force: Roughly 50,000 (estimated) sailors, manning 708 vessels including 3 frigates and 70 submarines. Green Water Navy (operates close to shore). Sounds like a lot, but they're counting patrol boats the size of a large fishing boat in those numbers. And those 70 submarines? All diesel-electric mini-subs with crew sizes under 15 produced domestically or imported/derived from post-WWII or early Cold War soviet designs. Still very dangerous, but not the blue water navy Kim & Co. front that they have. We could hunt them down and kill them by drawing them out into deeper water and banging them down with active sonar. We may not hear them at first, but we'd ping 'em and use Virginia Class Submarines, Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers and Anti-Submarine Ops from Fixed Wing and Helicopter Squadrons to hunt them down and kill them. These guys train all the time and would love to play Battleship with North Korea. Next...

Korean People's Air Force: Hahahahahahahahahahaha. Should not be able to use "Force" in it's title. Around 1500 aircraft. They do have 35 non-trainer MiG-29's ((NATO reporting-name "Fulcrum") and 5 UB model trainers that are decent and I suppose the ~56 MiG-23 (NATO reporting-name "Flogger") aren't relics, but it goes WAY downhill after that. Mostly old Soviet MiG-17's, MiG-21's or the Chinese export versions of 17's and 21's. Not to mention most are not airworthy and they don't have the money or resources to repair them. Or as Doc pointed out, gas to fly them. Super impressed. Example, they have at least 40 of these in "servicable" condition as "Strike Aircraft" (Can be found in Soviet Museum, as they retired these in the early 80's)

Strategic Rocket Forces: Obviously this one is the proverbial mother****er. They are in charge of all missile programs, including and up to Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) and nuclear weapon development. I won't even bother breaking it down since this is what we see all day in the news. Suffice it to say, they rest of their military is a joke. Numerically strong? Sure, they are certainly hanging their hat on their missile programs. Seriously, **** these guys. Here's a nice image of their capabilities (or lack thereof):

 

[PraetorianND]

If NK targeted Fukushima a lot of people would be in big trouble.

 

[DSully1995]

I hope you all realize that comparing/even acknowledging conventional force is ridiculous. The United States outspends the next 15 countries combined....


NK is just trying act s if its in some cold war typer power stuggle with the US. Acknowledging them makes them winners.

 

[Andy in Sactown]

I hope you all realize that comparing/even acknowledging conventional force is ridiculous. The United States outspends the next 15 countries combined....


NK is just trying act s if its in some cold war typer power stuggle with the US. Acknowledging them makes them winners.

I'm on the fence. If I believed their leadership to be rational and sane, with this being purely calculated without any intent, then I would agree absolutely.

However, Kim is a little cray cray, so some due diligence is certainly in order (from the military). But, point well served regarding the media coverage (**** giving him free ups).

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

I could see Jong Un doing an international "suicide by cop". Basically knowing that his power is fading and his country won't support him or be able to support itself that much longer, he goes out in a blaze of glory by nuking Japan & South Korea.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I hope you all realize that comparing/even acknowledging conventional force is ridiculous. The United States outspends the next 15 countries combined....


NK is just trying act s if its in some cold war typer power stuggle with the US. Acknowledging them makes them winners.

The US is using this scenario to pivot from Europe to Asia. This whole deal is a win for us.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

1) Our soldiers in South Korea and their safety should be atop the list.

2) When Kim Jong Un is bored with starving his people and playing with his dingaling, he should consult Japan before aiming missles at us.

3) North Korea is like the loud, boisterous, annoying kid on the playground who talks out of his *** and pounds his chest until someone hits him in the face.

4) I think there's a 4% chance this thing ever reaches the level of "oh $hit, it's nuke time", but I have a hard time imaging our "social justice" president pulling the trigger on one.

 

[greyhammer90]

I think there's a 4% chance this thing ever reaches the level of "oh $hit, it's nuke time", but I have a hard time imaging our "social justice" president pulling the trigger on one.

LOL. Yes. Obama has been really afraid to use military strikes on foreign soil.

Drone Strikes under the Bush Administration: 52
Drone Strikes under the Obama Administration: 310
Year Strikes Kills
2009 54 350-721
2010 122 608- 1,028
2011 72 366-599
2012 48 222-349
2013 8 47-58


What a pussy!

 

[Fbolt]

Reservation Form - Korean DMZ Tour

tours still going on-saber rattling

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

LOL. Yes. Obama has been really afraid to use military strikes on foreign soil.

Drone Strikes under the Bush Administration: 52
Drone Strikes under the Obama Administration: 310
Year Strikes Kills
2009 54 350-721
2010 122 608- 1,028
2011 72 366-599
2012 48 222-349
2013 8 47-58


What a pussy!

Obama's drone strikes and my position on them are well documented on this site. I was talking about a full scale nuclear scare, not air strikes or drone strikes. He'd give the green light on that one in a second.