North Korea orders missile units to prepare for war

Duggys Housemate

AllthingsCP wrote: »

That is all they did receive troop aid numbers have noting to do with it could be 10 million still troop aid.


I am no supporter of the DPRK but if you really look at their position their choice to maintain this hostile stand is what has made them last this long.

In their eyes why should they trust any other government first Japan invaded and where completed tyrants to Korea then they left USA decide to cut the country in half interfering in other country's affairs. If the big boys as such left the Korean people alone Korea would be a different place today. everyone wants a united country. The North has no choice but to pump ever bit of cash into the Defense policy if they didn't USA or South Korea would have made moves years ago. I know people are starving but at the end of the day if United States pulled back from the 48 par and let the South Korean Army take over would be a foot in the right direction Kim is a clever guy {Studied in UK} and would see this as a acted of good fate it mite just turn down the heat a bit.

Also the United States have deploy undercover vessels into Norths sea which is an act of war, they have sent subs stealth fighters have lunched attacks against them, Bush said after Iraq we go into North Korea! all acts of aggression. The North is turtleing their defensive as such with the odd slash out to show they are a force to be reckon with.

You seem to be missing who is the aggressor here. The US is not going to invade the North, the North may invade the South. If so they will be fighting as conquerors not defending their homeland. Once the Northern troops start to lose they will disband. The regime has probably bog all loyalty outside of fear of the consequences of regime reprisals, if they get to the South they will see the wealth of American "imperialism" ( In fact as all dissidents who escape NK now attest there are plenty of ways to watch SK, Chinese or Western TV in the North. So they already know)

So what would people be fighting for? The right to extreme poverty, dictatorship, famine and mind control.

The South Koreans will fight like dogs to not be like the North, the North will just collapse.

In 1988 not one analyst would have expected Communism to just collapse in Eastern Europe. The people were brainwashed, or controlled but loyal.

Then it disappeared.

The North Korean army could collapse like a house of cards.

Lockstep

This makes some interesting reading

It basically states that the antiquated NK military won't be able to last against the South, especially with US aid. It'll do damage as it will almost certainly use surprise and has 70% of its military near the DMZ but it can't last. It's air defenses are geriatric at best and the better surveillance systems of the South mean they know where every gun emplacement NK has along the DMZ.
The main variable is China, they're likely to take a dim view of NK engaging in any outright aggression but will probably step in to stop NK being overrun, exactly like they did in the Korean War.
Although given how unstable the Pyongyang regime is becoming, they're a lot less supportive than they used to be.

The North Korean military is a lot weaker than most people realise. Despite spending 25% of its GDP on its military, its military, tanks and aircraft are archaic and frequently even the soldiers go hungry. It also suffers from a shattered economy and chronic lack of fuel, spare parts and air power and simply can't stomach a prolonged war.

James Woolsey, a former CIA director estimates that the US and SK could shatter the North in less than 2 months, although an actual overrun would be prevented by China.

AllthingsCP

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You seem to be missing who is the aggressor here. The US is not going to invade the North, the North may invade the South. If so they will be fighting as conquerors not defending their homeland. Once the Northern troops start to lose they will disband. The regime has probably bog all loyalty outside of fear of the consequences of regime reprisals, if they get to the South they will see the wealth of American "imperialism" ( In fact as all dissidents who escape NK now attest there are plenty of ways to watch SK, Chinese or Western TV in the North. So they already know)

So what would people be fighting for? The right to extreme poverty, dictatorship, famine and mind control.

The South Koreans will fight like dogs to not be like the North, the North will just collapse.

In 1988 not one analyst would have expected Communism to just collapse in Eastern Europe. The people were brainwashed, or controlled but loyal.

Then it disappeared.

The North Korean army could collapse like a house of cards.

The aggressor here was the American's in the 50's this is all the same conflict North started the war but only after the United States half the country {North wanted a strong unify nation}

You are not thinking outside the box the Korea people are historically loyal to one leader.

If the North was giving some leeway and United States backed off thinks mite be different.

Whats changed from the 50's noting really in regards to life in the North only that 99 percent of North Korean believe united states to be the root of all evil

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

The aggressor here was the American's in the 50's this is all the same conflict North started the war but only after the United States half the country {North wanted a strong unify nation}

You are not thinking outside the box the Korea people are historically loyal to one leader.

If the North was giving some leeway and United States backed off thinks mite be different.

Whats changed from the 50's noting really in regards to life in the North only that 99 percent of North Korean believe united states to be the root of all evil

What?! You must be joking, America was never the aggressor pick up a history book and you'll see they liberated the South from the Japanese. Sure the North hates the Americans but that's to be expected from a brain washed nation.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What?! You must be joking, America was never the aggressor pick up a history book and you'll see they liberated the South from the Japanese. Sure the North hates the Americans but that's to be expected from a brain washed nation.

Wrong Korea was one whole country Americans did not free south, America annex Japan, Japan had annex Korea hence Korea fell below American control but the USSR had express interest in the Northern part,

As a result the United States drew the line and expected the Korean people to be happy about it.

Let draw a line from Kerry to Dublin and split the country and lets see how Irish feel about it.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Wrong Korea was one whole country Americans did not free south, America annex Japan, Japan had annex Korea hence Korea fell below American control but the USSR had express interest in the Northern part,

As a result the United States drew the line and expected the Korean people to be happy about it.

Let draw a line from Kerry to Dublin and split the country and lets see how Irish feel about it.

I'm not wrong, Japan surrendered to the USA and the USSR, the USA occupied the south and the USSR the north respectfully. Neither the USA or the USSR wanted to split the country, they would both have preferred to control the whole country but neither side was going to back down. The USA even wanted to have supervised elections over the whole peninsula after the war. I don't see why you blame the USA for this.

Read up a bit on life in Korea under Japan and tell me America didn't liberate them.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm not wrong, Japan surrendered to the USA and the USSR, the USA occupied the south and the USSR the north respectfully. Neither the USA or the USSR wanted to split the country, they would both have preferred to control the whole country but neither side was going to back down. The USA even wanted to have supervised elections over the whole peninsula after the war. I don't see why you blame the USA for this.

Read up a bit on life in Korea under Japan and tell me America didn't liberate them.

I stated this is one of posts that USSR and United States should have not interfere. So in the interest of the Korean people they should have been left to settle by them self's without the US and USSR playing war-games with them, That is why the American are hated in the North, You and so many other fall victim to US and World propaganda that the North are the aggressor. During the 50's 60's and 70's Northern Korean people had a better life then those of Southern Korea fact. American led talks and influence have seen that the North Korea infrastructure become a failure to weaking what the Military!. And then blame the NK government for been a bad government to damage NK trade and economy to yet again damage the moral of the people and military.

I wonder who is Brainwash ha go back and read your propaganda fed History books.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Read up a bit on life in Korea under Japan and tell me America didn't liberate them.

That is not liberation, Liberation means freedom to govern one self to settle internal affairs by one's self to the right of financial growth and a better life.

What the Korean got was a watered down liberation to suit the liberator on both sides

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

I stated this is one of posts that USSR and United States should have not interfere. So in the interest of the Korean people they should have been left to settle by them self's without the US and USSR playing war-games with them, That is why the American are hated in the North, You and so many other fall victim to US and World propaganda that the North are the aggressor. During the 50's 60's and 70's Northern Korean people had a better life then those of Southern Korea fact. American led talks and influence have seen that the North Korea infrastructure become a failure to weaking what the Military!. And then blame the NK government for been a bad government to damage NK trade and economy to yet again damage the moral of the people and military.

I wonder who is Brainwash ha go back and read your propaganda fed History books.

I don't even know where to start with this.

1. Life under Japan was much worse then life under the USA or the USSR.
2. The USA and USSR agreed to both occupy the country under a United Nations trusteeship for the express purpose of limiting each others influence until free and fair elections could be called over the whole peninsula.
3. The elections were scheduled and the USA had every intention of carrying them out but the USSR wouldn't co operate. Instead it went along with it's own little agenda and set up the DPRK a move which forced the USA's hands to make a similar move.
4. Two states with opposing ideologies was not the USA's first preference and while they knew it was not the ideal they were happy enough to accept the situation until North Korea backed by the USSR and China invaded the south.
5. The USA lent their support to the South to help them fight off Northern expansionism and the war ended in a stale mate. In no case did the USA advocate splitting the nation nor did they start the war but you blame them anyway because yank bashing seems to be in thing at the moment.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

That is not liberation, Liberation means freedom to govern one self to settle internal affairs by one's self to the right of financial growth and a better life.

What the Korean got was a watered down liberation to suit the liberator on both sides

What the Americans gave Korea was safe free elections across the whole country, a gift denied to them by the USSR.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I don't even know where to start with this.

1. Life under Japan was much worse then life under the USA or the USSR.
2. The USA and USSR agreed to both occupy the country under a United Nations trusteeship for the express purpose of limiting each others influence until free and fair elections could be called over the whole peninsula.
3. The elections were scheduled and the USA had every intention of carrying them out but the USSR wouldn't co operate. Instead it went along with it's own little agenda and set up the DPRK a move which forced the USA's hands to make a similar move.
4. Two states with opposing ideologies was not the USA's first preference and while they knew it was not the ideal they were happy enough to accept the situation until North Korea backed by the USSR and China invaded the south.
5. The USA lent their support to the South to help them fight off Northern expansionism and the war ended in a stale mate. In no case did the USA advocate splitting the nation nor did they start the war but you blame them anyway because yank bashing seems to be in thing at the moment.

They drew the Line two United States medium level officers were told to go into another room and draw the line. You are just backing up what i am saying about USA and USSR using this as a means to get to each other.China got involved after the Americans did to stop North been overrun the USSR was noted for not supplying the North during the war little to no support was offered by USSR

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What the Americans gave Korea was safe free elections across the whole country, a gift denied to them by the USSR.

What they were given was a war that would last nearly 70 years!.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

They drew the Line two United States medium level officers were told to go into another room and draw the line. You are just backing up what i am saying about USA and USSR using this as a means to get to each other.China got involved after the Americans did to stop North been overrun the USSR was noted for not supplying the North during the war little to no support was offered by USSR

I'm not backing up anything you say about the USA, they wanted free and fair elections across the whole country. They wanted to give the Korean people self determination in accordance with UN protocols but the Russians denied them.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

What they were given was a war that would last nearly 70 years!.

That was the Russians. Instead of allowing fair elections across the whole country they set up the DPRK, a country that would go on to invade the south with Russian support. The Americans fought to defend the south. Look I know it's cool to blame the Americans for everything but believe it or not they aren't responsible for every ill in the world.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I'm not backing up anything you say about the USA, they wanted free and fair elections across the whole country. They wanted to give the Korean people self determination in accordance with UN protocols but the Russians denied them.

Do you live in the United States? Are you looking for a green card to live their.
If not get off the bandwagon open your eyes.

Neither USSR or USA or even NATO had the right to interfere.

Would you believe me if i told you that United States also had plans for war with Britain and Canada in the 30's

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That was the Russians. Instead of allowing fair elections across the whole country they set up the DPRK, a country that would go on to invade the south with Russian support. The Americans fought to defend the south. Look I know it's cool to blame the Americans for everything but believe it or not they aren't responsible for every ill in the world.

DPRK sprung from a Northern Freedom group fighting the Jap's, Kim was an officer in one of the Battalion.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Do you live in the United States? Are you looking for a green card to live their.
If not get off the bandwagon open your eyes.

Neither USSR or USA or even NATO had the right to interfere.

Would you believe me if i told you that United States also had plans for war with Britain and Canada in the 30's

Both the United States and the USSR inherited Korea when the Japanese surrendered to them. The Americans had Korea in their possession as a consequence of war but they wanted rid of it, that's why they wanted free and fair elections across the whole country. But the USSR wouldn't co operate.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

DPRK sprung from a Northern Freedom group fighting the Jap's, Kim was an officer in one of the Battalion.

lol Kim was an officer in the Red Army. Source. You're really demonstrating your ignorance.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Both the United States and the USSR inherited Korea when the Japanese surrendered to them. The Americans had Korea in their possession as a consequence of war but they wanted rid of it, that's why they wanted free and fair elections across the whole country. But the USSR wouldn't co operate.

So you are saying that the United States had no plans against north and only wanted free elections yes.


But why then in December 1950 did USA start and embargo that lasted till 2008 and had plans to start a civil administration government in North Koreadays before any invasion took place..

From January 1958 till 98, the United States held nuclear weapons in South Korea for possible use against North Korea some times amount raise to 1000 war heads

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

So you are saying that the United States had no plans against north and only wanted free elections yes.


But why then in December 1950 did USA start and embargo that lasted till 2008 and had plans to start a civil administration government in North Koreadays before any invasion took place..

From January 1958 till 98, the United States held nuclear weapons in South Korea for possible use against North Korea some times amount raise to 1000 war heads

As a consequence of the Korean war which started in June 1950. And is still on going.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

lol Kim was an officer in the Red Army. Source. You're really demonstrating your ignorance.

Not for his entire life lol, he was founder of Down-With-Imperialism Union 1926.

In 1935, Kim became a member of the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army, a guerrilla group led by the Communist Party of China. K
In 1935 Kim was appointed commander of the 6th division in 1937, at the age of 24,

Kim was appointed commander of the 2nd operational region for the 1st Army, but by the end of 1940, he was the only 1st Army leader still alive. Pursued by Japanese troops, Kim and what remained of his army escaped by crossing the Amur River into the Soviet Union. Kim was sent to a camp near Khabarovsk, where the Korean Communist guerrillas were retrained by the Soviets. Kim became a Major in the Soviet Red Army and served in it until the end of World War II.

His entire life was spend fighting the Japs

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

As a consequence of the Korean war which started in June 1950. And is still on going.

Am embargo was placed 17 days before the outbreak of the war one again in December

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Not for his entire life lol, he was founder of Down-With-Imperialism Union 1926.

In 1935, Kim became a member of the Northeast Anti-Japanese United Army, a guerrilla group led by the Communist Party of China.
In 1935 Kim was appointed commander of the 6th division in 1937, at the age of 24,

Kim was appointed commander of the 2nd operational region for the 1st Army, but by the end of 1940, he was the only 1st Army leader still alive. Pursued by Japanese troops, Kim and what remained of his army escaped by crossing the Amur River into the Soviet Union. Kim was sent to a camp near Khabarovsk, where the Korean Communist guerrillas were retrained by the Soviets. Kim became a Major in the Soviet Red Army and served in it until the end of World War II.

His entire life was spend fighting the Japs

But thst's not what you said. You said the DPRK sprung from northern guerrillas giving the impression of independence of foundation from the USSR I said if Kim was a Russian officer his country was hardly set up independently. The DPRK was never more then a Russian puppet state who tried to violently take over the whole peninsula.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But thst's not what you said. You said the DPRK sprung from northern guerrillas giving the impression of independence of foundation from the USSR I said if Kim was a Russian officer his country was hardly set up independently. The DPRK was never more then a Russian puppet state who tried to violently take over the whole peninsula.

He was retrained by the Russian Army. And the South was never more then a means to an end for USA backs up first few posts

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Am embargo was placed 17 days before the outbreak of the war one again in December

You're presuming the USA had no intelligence of the USSR's plans. In the Cold War.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You're presuming the USA had no intelligence of the USSR's plans. In the Cold War.

Yes and you are presuming that the United State have noting but good intentions.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Yes and you are presuming that the United State have noting but good intentions.

In this case they did. They wanted elections because they thought it would result in a capitalist victory. The Russians obviously thought that too.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

He was retrained by the Russian Army. And the South was never more then a means to an end for USA backs up first few posts

The Russians put him in charge because they knew he would be loyal to them.

Solair

I'd say the main intentions of all neighbouring countries (including China) will be to avoid a total mess!

The world doesn't need another Korean War! Especially, at a time when there's already international economic chaos going on !

The US & EU (worlds two largest markets by a long shot) are still in trouble and if Asia were to be suddenly screwed up by this conflict, it would have really serious consequences for the global economy, including any Irish recovery!

This could be a complete disaster !

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

In this case they did. They wanted elections because they thought it would result in a capitalist victory. The Russians obviously thought that too.

So what dose that mean, It means the United States where using the Korean people to achieve US victory Cap vs Com Korean people where just pawns for the two players to use in their game

Rascasse

I'd imagine if it does kick off (which I highly doubt as Kim can't be that stupid) the North Koreans would be quickly over powered with a bit of sustained 'shock and awe' from the air. The problem South Korea would have would be stopping a ground war.

I wonder how much the North Koreans know about life in the South? And how many truly believe in the Juche nonsense? I can't see them putting up much of a fight if know what unification would mean (end of food shortages, end of forced labour camps, jobs, democracy).

AllthingsCP

Rascasse wrote: »

I'd imagine if it does kick off (which I highly doubt as Kim can't be that stupid) the North Koreans would be quickly over powered with a bit of sustained 'shock and awe' from the air. The problem South Korea would have would be stopping a ground war.

I wonder how much the North Koreans know about life in the South? And how many truly believe in the Juche nonsense? I can't see them putting up much of a fight if know what unification would mean (end of food shortages, end of forced labour camps, jobs, democracy).

Quickly i do not think so, That what everyone said about the 50's and it still has not ended.

Nobody can predict a conflict outcome in Korea otherwise the United States would have entered years ago.

But what they can predict is huge financial cost that they mite not recover if the counter invasion fails. Huge death tolls on all sides, Unstable bonds in that part of Asia with big player so close by like Russia and China that mite decide to kick the dog while its down type thing.
.

They would have to waste resources to another long war whiles Iran sits tight. Remember in the Last US war games US lost to Iran.

Sierra Oscar

Rascasse wrote: »

I'd imagine if it does kick off (which I highly doubt as Kim can't be that stupid) the North Koreans would be quickly over powered with a bit of sustained 'shock and awe' from the air. The problem South Korea would have would be stopping a ground war.

I wouldn't underestimate the North Korean air defence network. Yes it is ageing, but significant investment has continued down through the years. The skies over Pyongyang alone are like a fortress.

Also, North Korea knows it lacks air superiority. That is reflected though its military doctrine. They have attempted to compensate for this lack of air superiority by moving military installations underground - from putting entire military bases underground to installing underground runways, they have essentially done it all. South Korea would still have to launch a major ground incursion. Air superiority will not ensure that any potential conflict would only last a mere couple of days, contrary to popular belief.

AllthingsCP

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I wouldn't underestimate the North Korean air defence network. Yes it is ageing, but significant investment has continued down through the years. The skies over Pyongyang alone are like a fortress.

Also, North Korea knows it lacks air superiority. That is reflected though its military doctrine. They have attempted to compensate for this lack of air superiority by moving military installations underground - from putting entire military bases underground to installing underground runways, they have essentially done it all. South Korea would still have to launch a major ground incursion. Air superiority will not ensure that any potential conflict would only last a mere couple of days, contrary to popular belief.

Agreed, US and SK believe that they only found 50-75 percent of NK underground tunnels into the south.

AllthingsCP

Source US Department of Defense http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=27769


North Korean Military 'Very Credible Conventional Force'

By Kathleen T. Rhem
American Forces Press Service
SEOUL, South Korea, Nov. 18, 2003 – With 1.2 million people under arms, the North Korean military is "a very credible conventional force," the U.S. general in charge of defending against that force said.
"They have the largest submarine force, the largest special operating force and the largest artillery in the world," Army Gen. Leon LaPorte, commander of U.S. forces in South Korea said. He noted that North Korea has 120,000 special operations forces.
LaPorte briefed reporters traveling through the region with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Nov. 17. He answered questions on the future of U.S. forces in Korea and capabilities of the South Korean military, as well as the threat posed by North Korea.
LaPorte said the North Korean army is more of a threat than the navy and air force, because they have limited access to modern technology.
The sheer size of their military makes them a threat, even if their equipment isn't as up to date as it could be. "Much of their equipment is aged, but they have a lot of it," LaPorte said.
Perhaps more importantly, North Korea poses a significant asymmetric threat. The country possesses chemical weapons, and "their doctrine is to use chemical weapons as a standard munition," LaPorte said.
American officials are also concerned about North Korea's weapons of mass destruction, including potential use of its 800 missiles of various ranges. "The missiles themselves are a significant asymmetrical threat," LaPorte said. "But if that was combined with a nuclear capability, now you have a capability that not only threatens the peninsula but threatens the entire region."

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

So what dose that mean, It means the United States where using the Korean people to achieve US victory Cap vs Com Korean people where just pawns for the two players to use in their game

It means the USA (in this instance) had the best interests of the Korean people at heart.

Manic Moran

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Quickly i do not think so, That what everyone said about the 50's and it still has not ended.

Nobody can predict a conflict outcome in Korea otherwise the United States would have entered years ago.

But what they can predict is huge financial cost that they mite not recover if the counter invasion fails. Huge death tolls on all sides, Unstable bonds in that part of Asia with big player so close by like Russia and China that mite decide to kick the dog while its down type thing.

I don't think there is very much doubt as to the overall outcome in US circles. They just don't think it's worth the cost in money and lives, better to contain them and hope for an internal collapse/coup/restructuring/detente/whatever.

As to the DoD statement (From ten years ago), they are generally correct. I would be far more concerned for my safety were I to be sent to a shooting war in Korea than I was in Iraq or Afghanistan. That does not, however, mean that I am concerned as to what will happen in the big picture. DPRK would lose. It's simply a matter of G-4 bring up enough ammunition quickly enough.

AllthingsCP

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't think there is very much doubt as to the overall outcome in US circles. They just don't think it's worth the cost in money and lives, better to contain them and hope for an internal collapse/coup/restructuring/detente/whatever.

As to the DoD statement (From ten years ago), they are generally correct. I would be far more concerned for my safety were I to be sent to a shooting war in Korea than I was in Iraq or Afghanistan. That does not, however, mean that I am concerned as to what will happen in the big picture. DPRK would lose. It's simply a matter of G-4 bring up enough ammunition quickly enough.

Well of course North Korea would eventually lose compared to a better infrastructural based country. But if China did side with NK then could be a diffrent story and mite play out like the 1950's.

My point is to tell people not to undermined NK ability to fight a war.

Lockstep

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't think there is very much doubt as to the overall outcome in US circles. They just don't think it's worth the cost in money and lives, better to contain them and hope for an internal collapse/coup/restructuring/detente/whatever.

As to the DoD statement (From ten years ago), they are generally correct. I would be far more concerned for my safety were I to be sent to a shooting war in Korea than I was in Iraq or Afghanistan. That does not, however, mean that I am concerned as to what will happen in the big picture. DPRK would lose. It's simply a matter of G-4 bring up enough ammunition quickly enough.

^This.

AllthingsCP: In 2003, the US wargames made it clear that NK would lose if it came to war (at the same time as that DoD bulletin you're referencing). North Korea has a strong military but one that couldn't face the combined South and US.
This hasn't changed, in fact, it's gotten worse as the North has stagnated while South Korea has grown stronger and more advanced.
A war with North Korea would be bloody, brutal and cost millions of lives (with North Korea using its stocks of smallpox, plague and gasses) but the North can't win and would utterly collapse to a combined South Korean/US offensive within 1-2 months.
However, the US and SK know how brutal this war would be and while they would certainly win, it's too costly for them to bother with (according to GlobalSecurity)

The North's strategy is to try and knock out Seoul quickly before the South can mobilise its far better resources and advanced military.
China IS the key variable but they're not a blanket guarantor of NK: they will only intervene if its in their interests to do so and with NK becoming increasingly unstable and erratic, they might just decide to support a regime change rather than the batsh!t insane hierarchy that currently exists.
Even if they do back NK, they're not going to risk war with the US. Far more likely, they'll only intervene if the US and SK threaten to overrun NK (as this would risk the end of the NK buffer state.
Remember that in the North Korean War, China only intervened militarily when NK's offensive collapsed and they were pushed back into their own territory. China wants a buffer zone, it has no especial love for NK and won't give them a blanket military guarantee.

Jonny7

The UN head Ban Ki Moon just said "crisis has gone too far" and wants to negotiate with NK (mainly due to NK restarting it's closed down reactor)

NK leadership may get their lobster and ivory back-scratchers after all.

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Source US Department of Defense http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=27769


North Korean Military 'Very Credible Conventional Force'

By Kathleen T. Rhem
American Forces Press Service
SEOUL, South Korea, Nov. 18, 2003 – With 1.2 million people under arms, the North Korean military is "a very credible conventional force," the U.S. general in charge of defending against that force said.
"They have the largest submarine force, the largest special operating force and the largest artillery in the world," Army Gen. Leon LaPorte, commander of U.S. forces in South Korea said. He noted that North Korea has 120,000 special operations forces.
LaPorte briefed reporters traveling through the region with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Nov. 17. He answered questions on the future of U.S. forces in Korea and capabilities of the South Korean military, as well as the threat posed by North Korea.
LaPorte said the North Korean army is more of a threat than the navy and air force, because they have limited access to modern technology.
The sheer size of their military makes them a threat, even if their equipment isn't as up to date as it could be. "Much of their equipment is aged, but they have a lot of it," LaPorte said.
Perhaps more importantly, North Korea poses a significant asymmetric threat. The country possesses chemical weapons, and "their doctrine is to use chemical weapons as a standard munition," LaPorte said.
American officials are also concerned about North Korea's weapons of mass destruction, including potential use of its 800 missiles of various ranges. "The missiles themselves are a significant asymmetrical threat," LaPorte said. "But if that was combined with a nuclear capability, now you have a capability that not only threatens the peninsula but threatens the entire region."

You mentioned you wanted me to comment on this, what do you want me to say?

AllthingsCP

Lockstep wrote: »

^This.

AllthingsCP: In 2003, the US wargames made it clear that NK would lose if it came to war (at the same time as that DoD bulletin you're referencing). North Korea has a strong military but one that couldn't face the combined South and US.
This hasn't changed, in fact, it's gotten worse as the North has stagnated while South Korea has grown stronger and more advanced.
A war with North Korea would be bloody, brutal and cost millions of lives (with North Korea using its stocks of smallpox, plague and gasses) but the North can't win and would utterly collapse to a combined South Korean/US offensive within 1-2 months.
However, the US and SK know how brutal this war would be and while they would certainly win, it's too costly for them to bother with (according to GlobalSecurity)

The North's strategy is to try and knock out Seoul quickly before the South can mobilise its far better resources and advanced military.
China IS the key variable but they're not a blanket guarantor of NK: they will only intervene if its in their interests to do so and with NK becoming increasingly unstable and erratic, they might just decide to support a regime change rather than the batsh!t insane hierarchy that currently exists.
Even if they do back NK, they're not going to risk war with the US. Far more likely, they'll only intervene if the US and SK threaten to overrun NK (as this would risk the end of the NK buffer state.
Remember that in the North Korean War, China only intervened militarily when NK's offensive collapsed and they were pushed back into their own territory. China wants a buffer zone, it has no especial love for NK and won't give them a blanket military guarantee.

Its common sense that they would eventually lose. But over in 1-2 months i do not thinks so.

after the regular army is defeated and guerrilla warfare tactics are installed you would be looking at another Vietnam, If the USA wanted to install some puppet government you would be looking at years of civil conflict withing the country and the close neighbors, Middle east all over again.

AllthingsCP

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You mentioned you wanted me to comment on this, what do you want me to say?

Yawn!

Iwasfrozen

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Yawn!

Lockstep

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Its common sense that they would eventually lose. But over in 1-2 months i do not thinks so.

You might not think so but that's not the expert opinion (in this case, a former CIA director and US Air Force General)

AllthingsCP wrote: »

after the regular army is defeated and guerrilla warfare tactics are installed you would be looking at another Vietnam, If the USA wanted to install some puppet government you would be looking at years of civil conflict withing the country and the close neighbors, Middle east all over again.

You're ignoring the crucial factor: public support, which the US Counterinsurgency Field Manual refers to as the 'centre of gravity' for insurgency and guerilla warfare. The North Korean state lacks this.
North Koreans are starving, even with the "Military First" policy, soldiers frequently go hungry. Most North Koreans would go for whoever can feed them.

AllthingsCP

Lockstep wrote: »

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Its common sense that they would eventually lose. But over in 1-2 months i do not thinks so. [/quote[
You might not think so but that's not the expert opinion (in this case, a former CIA director and US Air Force General)


You're ignoring the crucial factor: public support, which the US Counterinsurgency Field Manual refers to as the 'centre of gravity' for insurgency and guerilla warfare. The North Korean state lacks this.
North Koreans are starving, even with the "Military First" policy, soldiers frequently go hungry. Most North Koreans would go for whoever can feed them.

Sorry, Your point is valid if we were talking about Iraq, Afgan {To an extend} but not North Korea, Korean people are historically and traditional known to be loyal in tick and tin, even if only a small faction carried out the war in hit and runs tactics, Do the Americans and the rest really want that hassle especial so close to two major players like China and Russia their is no way to fully predict the outcome, the only guarantee with a war with Korea is that many will died

Lockstep

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Sorry, Your point is valid if we were talking about Iraq, Afgan {To an extend} but not North Korea, Korean people are historically and traditional known to be loyal in tick and tin, even if only a small faction carried out the war in hit and runs tactics

Actually, it's not. There are so many defectors from North Korea that South Korea has set up special training schools so that they learn basic survival skills for living in a non-totalitarian regime.
North Koreans are constantly close to starvation. While there certainly those who are strong supporters of Juche, many others are just trying to survive in a country where malnutrition and oppression is rife.
In a situation where the oppressive state breaks down and the common citizenry are offered survival, there's no chance of sustained guerilla warfare. Cambodia is a good example.

AllthingsCP wrote: »

Do the Americans and the rest really want that hassle especial so close to two major players like China and Russia their is no way to fully predict the outcome, the only guarantee with a war with Korea is that many will died

No, they don't which is why North Korea still exists: it's too much hassle to take on. It's the nation-equivalent of the headstrong but weak kid who mouths off to bigger kids a lot. It might be weaker than they are but it's too much effort to take on as it won't go down without a fight, even if it's certainly going to be a victory. However, if the kid pushes too far, it's going down and it can't do anything about that.

China is the kid's exasperated older brother. He's not going to get too involved in the kid's scraps unless he gets is in serious danger.

You're deadright that there's no guarantee but the evidence overwhelmingly suggests a NK defeat, with China only getting involved if its own border is threatened (as in, if the US and SK overrun into NK)

Basically, a war would turn into a shattered NK with heavy losses on the South. Nothing would be achieved except a lot of bloodshed and further destabilisation of NK which is already erratic enough. Although this might actually suit China which doesn't want to get dragged into NK's posturing and would probably welcome a more stable buffer state.

AllthingsCP

Lockstep wrote: »

Actually, it's not. There are so many defectors from North Korea that South Korea has set up special training schools so that they learn basic survival skills for living in a non-totalitarian regime.
North Koreans are constantly close to starvation. While there certainly those who are strong supporters of Juche, many others are just trying to survive in a country where malnutrition and oppression is rife.
In a situation where the oppressive state breaks down and the common citizenry are offered survival, there's no chance of sustained guerilla warfare. Cambodia is a good example.


No, they don't which is why North Korea still exists: it's too much hassle to take on. It's the nation-equivalent of the headstrong but weak kid who mouths off to bigger kids a lot. It might be weaker than they are but it's too much effort to take on as it won't go down without a fight, even if it's certainly going to be a victory. However, if the kid pushes too far, it's going down and it can't do anything about that.

China is the kid's exasperated older brother. He's not going to get too involved in the kid's scraps unless he gets is in serious danger.

You're deadright that there's no guarantee but the evidence overwhelmingly suggests a NK defeat, with China only getting involved if its own border is threatened (as in, if the US and SK overrun into NK)

Basically, a war would turn into a shattered NK with heavy losses on the South. Nothing would be achieved except a lot of bloodshed and further destabilisation of NK which is already erratic enough. Although this might actually suit China which doesn't want to get dragged into NK's posturing and would probably welcome a more stable buffer state.

Your right their main regular army would be defeated within 3-6 months. their reserve of 5 million would probably do what the Iraq conscripts did.

AllthingsCP

But if all dose come to a foot war i pretty the front line troops that most would not have witness a war like this

Lockstep

That's very true, any war with NK would be an absolute bloodbath. NK has an old fashioned military but it would start with a mass artillery barrage and probably the use of its germ warfare stockpiles. Plus its military is still heavily influenced by attrition warfare so the casualty rate on both sides would be catastrophic.