How would a US strike on North Korea go down?

[Svnla]

I hope there will be no war over there because it will be a big mess for everyone (US, SK, Japan, NK, China, Russia, and others).

 

[Grooveriding]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/03/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Per the NYT right now:

The conventional wisdom has always been that Mr. Kim, like his father and grandfather before him, is mostly motivated by a deep desire to preserve the family business — a small country that is an improbable, walled-off survivor of Cold War.

But inside the Trump administration, many have begun to question the long-held assumption that his nuclear buildup is essentially defensive, an effort to keep the United States and its allies from finding the right moment to try to overthrow him.

Mr. Kim’s real goal may be blackmail, they argue — the sort that would be possible as soon as North Korean can put Los Angeles or Chicago or New York at risk.

It may be splitting the United States away from two allies — Japan and South Korea — who wonder whether the United States would really protect them, and half-expect Mr. Trump to make good on his campaign threat that he might pull American troops from the Pacific.

Or it may be about making Mr. Kim a power broker, a man Mr. Trump and Xi Jingping — leaders of the two superpowers Mr. Kim is fixated on — must treat as an equal.

Maybe it is about all three.

You're right on the blackmail point. I've read it before as well and should have included it, because it does seem reasonable. Even in that scenario, I do find it hard to believe that after payment is refused NK decides to commit suicide by launching a nuclear strike. I think NK gets played up a lot as it's a good talking point for a blowhard like Trump. Kim-Jung and Trump are two peas in a pod; lunatics with big mouths and no action to back it up.

 

[BoomerD]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s93KC4AGKnY

 

[Grooveriding]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5202ea-90b4-11e7-8754-d478688d23b4_story.html

OKYO — South Korea’s president tried late Sunday to dismiss talk of a dispute between Seoul and Washington over how to deal with North Korea following its sixth nuclear test, after President Trump criticized the South Korean approach as “appeasement.”

Moon Jae-in’s office said that his government would continue to work towards peaceful denuclearization after tweets and actions from Trump that have left South Koreans scratching their heads at why the American president is attacking an ally at such a sensitive time.

As if to underline Seoul’s willingness to be tough, the South Korean military conducted bombing drills at dawn Monday, practicing ballistic missile strikes on the North Korean nuclear test site at Punggye-ri.

The South Korean military calculated the distance to the site and practiced having F-15 jet fighters accurately hit the target, the joint chiefs of staff said Monday morning.

....

This is an example of why the situation is so disconcerting with Trump being a nut job that no one is sure what to make of. It used to only be NK that the world had to worry about having a lunatic in control of nukes, now it's the US as well with a nutcase and a lot more nukes. You don't know what to expect when it comes to mentally ill irrational individuals. There are two of them talking crazy across the ocean at one another right now.

Using Twitter to tear into the country that stands to lose the most in human life and infrastructure, over the actions of another nation that are beyond their control. Bizarre and irrational. Possibly due to SK not being that positive towards Trump? Trying to achieve anything productive with Trump must be impossible for other world leaders. How do you navigate the psychology of a man-child that is still upset over mean things people said to him years ago? Say something he takes wrong or can't handle and he'll stamp his feet and kick dirt at you on social media. It must be like having a six year old trying to lead a board meeting of adults. You're just going to spin your wheels while the child gets distracted by shiny objects in between crying for their snack or a nap.

Trump's behaviour is sociopathic to the point he doesn't seem to get that eventually his big mouth will incite a real crisis. Put him in his crib with his pacifier and Twitter. Keep him far away from the situations where he could get wind up wiping us all out. The man doesn't give a shit for anything but himself. The decision to first strike for Trump would just hinge on how it would make him feel and reflect on him. He could care less about how it would actually impact the lives of everyone involved. A sociopath with a size complex on one side and a crazed guy who thinks he's a god-child on the other. Those are interchangeable making it hard to know which is which. They both even have crazy haircuts too

 

[cytg111]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5202ea-90b4-11e7-8754-d478688d23b4_story.html



This is an example of why the situation is so disconcerting with Trump being a nut job that no one is sure what to make of. It used to only be NK that the world had to worry about having a lunatic in control of nukes, now it's the US as well with a nutcase and a lot more nukes. You don't know what to expect when it comes to mentally ill irrational individuals. There are two of them talking crazy across the ocean at one another right now.

Using Twitter to tear into the country that stands to lose the most in human life and infrastructure, over the actions of another nation that are beyond their control. Bizarre and irrational. Possibly due to SK not being that positive towards Trump? Trying to achieve anything productive with Trump must be impossible for other world leaders. How do you navigate the psychology of a man-child that is still upset over mean things people said to him years ago? Say something he takes wrong or can't handle and he'll stamp his feet and kick dirt at you on social media. It must be like having a six year old trying to lead a board meeting of adults. You're just going to spin your wheels while the child gets distracted by shiny objects in between crying for their snack or a nap.

Trump's behaviour is sociopathic to the point he doesn't seem to get that eventually his big mouth will incite a real crisis. Put him in his crib with his pacifier and Twitter. Keep him far away from the situations where he could get wind up wiping us all out. The man doesn't give a shit for anything but himself. The decision to first strike for Trump would just hinge on how it would make him feel and reflect on him. He could care less about how it would actually impact the lives of everyone involved. A sociopath with a size complex on one side and a crazed guy who thinks he's a god-child on the other. Those are interchangeable making it hard to know which is which. They both even have crazy haircuts too

Mueller may have to cut his job short in order to get this nutjob out of office before something really bad happens.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I can sum up what military action against NK will mean for everyone in a single word....SAD!

 

[NTMBK]

Remember we're talking about a situation where it might be possible to get a nuke off. IMO the best way to reduce that risk is to take out Kim at home. His palace is likely hardened against ordinary bombardment, but an unannounced GBU-57 would eliminate that obstacle. After than other aircraft, but a surprise decapitation strike makes the most sense to me, but what the heck do I know.

You'd better be damn sure that you hit him first time. You need solid intel to pin down precisely which one of his 14 official residences (and god knows how many unofficial ones) he's in- and intel on the DPRK is notoriously patchy. You need to make sure you hit it with enough ordnance to take out the entire underground hardened bunker complex. Because if you try to kill him and miss, what exactly is his incentive to not launch a nuclear tipped missile at the US? His life (the most important thing to him) is already on the line, and he needs to demonstrate that he's serious. Nuke Hawaii, and threaten that LA is next if the US doesn't lay off the assassination attempts. If it works, he gets to live, and if it doesn't work, the US continue to try to kill him and he's no worse off than when he started (except maybe he goes out to a nuke instead of conventional weapons).

Even if you have the best intel in the world, the most powerful weapons in the world... it's never a certain thing. The US tried to do the same thing at the start of the invasion of Iraq, dropping a huge pile of ordnance on a compound where they believed Saddam to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Opening_salvo:_the_Dora_Farms_strike He wasn't there. Imagine you have a projected 70% chance of success. Do you take that risk, given the potential repercussions if you botch it?

Hell, even if you do take out Kim, no doubt some ambitious general will be all too happy to step into his shoes and launch a revenge attack.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You'd better be damn sure that you hit him first time. You need solid intel to pin down precisely which one of his 14 official residences (and god knows how many unofficial ones) he's in- and intel on the DPRK is notoriously patchy. You need to make sure you hit it with enough ordnance to take out the entire underground hardened bunker complex. Because if you try to kill him and miss, what exactly is his incentive to not launch a nuclear tipped missile at the US? His life (the most important thing to him) is already on the line, and he needs to demonstrate that he's serious. Nuke Hawaii, and threaten that LA is next if the US doesn't lay off the assassination attempts. If it works, he gets to live, and if it doesn't work, the US continue to try to kill him and he's no worse off than when he started (except maybe he goes out to a nuke instead of conventional weapons).

Even if you have the best intel in the world, the most powerful weapons in the world... it's never a certain thing. The US tried to do the same thing at the start of the invasion of Iraq, dropping a huge pile of ordnance on a compound where they believed Saddam to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Opening_salvo:_the_Dora_Farms_strike He wasn't there. Imagine you have a projected 70% chance of success. Do you take that risk, given the potential repercussions if you botch it?

Hell, even if you do take out Kim, no doubt some ambitious general will be all too happy to step into his shoes and launch a revenge attack.

Our capabilities have increased between now and Iraq. Assuming Mattis and his peers are running the ops the would take possible locations into account so hit everything at once and the other key leaders as well. A guarantee? By no means, it's going to be a complete disaster no matter what, but there is potential mitigation.

Considering that even South Korean liberals are putting pressure on Moon to adopt policy changes it's a pretty good idea to stay on top of things even if we would wish it otherwise.

 

[brycejones]

You'd better be damn sure that you hit him first time. You need solid intel to pin down precisely which one of his 14 official residences (and god knows how many unofficial ones) he's in- and intel on the DPRK is notoriously patchy. You need to make sure you hit it with enough ordnance to take out the entire underground hardened bunker complex. Because if you try to kill him and miss, what exactly is his incentive to not launch a nuclear tipped missile at the US? His life (the most important thing to him) is already on the line, and he needs to demonstrate that he's serious. Nuke Hawaii, and threaten that LA is next if the US doesn't lay off the assassination attempts. If it works, he gets to live, and if it doesn't work, the US continue to try to kill him and he's no worse off than when he started (except maybe he goes out to a nuke instead of conventional weapons).

Even if you have the best intel in the world, the most powerful weapons in the world... it's never a certain thing. The US tried to do the same thing at the start of the invasion of Iraq, dropping a huge pile of ordnance on a compound where they believed Saddam to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Opening_salvo:_the_Dora_Farms_strike He wasn't there. Imagine you have a projected 70% chance of success. Do you take that risk, given the potential repercussions if you botch it?

Hell, even if you do take out Kim, no doubt some ambitious general will be all too happy to step into his shoes and launch a revenge attack.

If the attack misses it won't be Trumps fault. He will find a way to blame Obama.

 

[NTMBK]

Our capabilities have increased between now and Iraq. Assuming Mattis and his peers are running the ops the would take possible locations into account so hit everything at once and the other key leaders as well. A guarantee? By no means, it's going to be a complete disaster no matter what, but there is potential mitigation.

The capabilities might have increased, but the intelligence about NK will be much worse than it was the Iraq.

 

[Genx87]

I still think if NK does something China invades to the SK border. China wants a buffer between them and SK. But they understand if NK goes too far we will invade. They would rather deal with the problem than allow the west to their border.

That said with Drumpf anything is possible. And that is the scary part.

 

[FIVR]

Do you take that risk, given the potential repercussions if you botch it?

@Hayabusa Rider takes that risk. He knows that the US THAAD and Patriot missile defense systems are 100% impregnable and besides that, he knows that North Korea could never design a true ICBM capable of nuclear delivery. He also knows that US intelligence is so good it will obviously figure out where Kim Jong Un is. That failed strike in Iraq was just a fluke. Same with the decapitation strikes in Libya, both times they did they were flukes. Lots of flukes but don't worry, he knows the real deal.


Haven't you read his posts?

 

[UglyCasanova]

You'd better be damn sure that you hit him first time. You need solid intel to pin down precisely which one of his 14 official residences (and god knows how many unofficial ones) he's in- and intel on the DPRK is notoriously patchy. You need to make sure you hit it with enough ordnance to take out the entire underground hardened bunker complex. Because if you try to kill him and miss, what exactly is his incentive to not launch a nuclear tipped missile at the US? His life (the most important thing to him) is already on the line, and he needs to demonstrate that he's serious. Nuke Hawaii, and threaten that LA is next if the US doesn't lay off the assassination attempts. If it works, he gets to live, and if it doesn't work, the US continue to try to kill him and he's no worse off than when he started (except maybe he goes out to a nuke instead of conventional weapons).

Even if you have the best intel in the world, the most powerful weapons in the world... it's never a certain thing. The US tried to do the same thing at the start of the invasion of Iraq, dropping a huge pile of ordnance on a compound where they believed Saddam to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq#Opening_salvo:_the_Dora_Farms_strike He wasn't there. Imagine you have a projected 70% chance of success. Do you take that risk, given the potential repercussions if you botch it?

Hell, even if you do take out Kim, no doubt some ambitious general will be all too happy to step into his shoes and launch a revenge attack.

It doesn't matter if we hit him or not, if an attack is launched they retaliate. And you're right that if Kim is taken out there would be a power struggle and someone would step up to be the new dear leader. But that's a moot point imo because by that point the damage is done and both NK and SK are laid to waste.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

@Hayabusa Rider takes that risk. He knows that the US THAAD and Patriot missile defense systems are 100% impregnable and besides that, he knows that North Korea could never design a true ICBM capable of nuclear delivery. He also knows that US intelligence is so good it will obviously figure out where Kim Jong Un is. That failed strike in Iraq was just a fluke. Same with the decapitation strikes in Libya, both times they did they were flukes. Lots of flukes but don't worry, he knows the real deal.


Haven't you read his posts?

Still lying, eh?

 

[urvile]

A nuclear armed mad man, a hermit kingdom, millions of lives at stake, a region on the brink of war...only one man can save them
starring the donald
in
DONALD TRUMP the MOVIE

"it's the best it's just the best movie made by the best people" ~donald trump
"god damn I look good in that suit"~donald trump
"if I can defeat vince mcmahon at his own game I can defeat anyone"~donald trump

 

[UglyCasanova]

I'm not advocating for war and there is no good answer, but I think the situation in NK should give everyone pause on the Iran deal and ultimately if a country wants it they'll get it. And it wouldn't surprise me if NK sold some of their technical know how to the Iranians as well. It's only a matter of time before we are looking at seismograph readings from the ME (more than there already is).

 

[Puffnstuff]

If Iran helped them develop those weapons it stands to reason that they also possess them but are savvy enough to remain silent about it.

 

[FIVR]

Still lying, eh?

Care to point out what I said that was a lie?


Here, while you fumble for something that won't make you look even more stupid, read this:

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/04/undercover-in-north-korea-all-paths-lead-to-catastrophe/


I know you don't know anything about the issue and refuse to learn anything from mine or anyone else's posts, but perhaps you are capable of reading an article by somebody who has actually been to North Korea and who actually knows the nature of the conflict.


who am i kidding, right? you don't read articles. Oh well, I tried.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Care to point out what I said that was a lie?


Here, while you fumble for something that won't make you look even more stupid, read this:

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/04/undercover-in-north-korea-all-paths-lead-to-catastrophe/


I know you don't know anything about the issue and refuse to learn anything from mine or anyone else's posts, but perhaps you are capable of reading an article by somebody who has actually been to North Korea and who actually knows the nature of the conflict.


who am i kidding, right? you don't read articles. Oh well, I tried.

Find where I said that NK would never have ICBM capability. Worshiper of Kim, there is no good solution to NK, but your master isn't going to emerge victorious with his super submarine, a 1950's era USSR diesel.

 

[FIVR]

Find where I said that NK would never have ICBM capability. Worshiper of Kim, there is no good solution to NK, but your master isn't going to emerge victorious with his super submarine, a 1950's era USSR diesel.

I don't have time to use forum search but I have a good memory. You argued with me at length when they launched their shorter range missiles and you claimed they weren't capable of sending anything to the US mainland. At the time, I pointed out that NK has submarines and doesn't necessarily require an ICBM to hit the US. I also stated they would develop an ICBM that could hit the US. This was long before they tested their Hwasong-12 missile and it flew the equivalent of 10,000km, easily threatening the US mainland.


So, you argued they would never be able to hit the US with an ICBM.. not that they would never have ICBM capability (that would have been stupid as they already launched shorter range missiles). You were wrong.

How is your reading going. Did you learn anything new? Lol...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I don't have time to use forum search but I have a good memory. You argued with me at length when they launched their shorter range missiles and you claimed they weren't capable of sending anything to the US mainland. At the time, I pointed out that NK has submarines and doesn't necessarily require an ICBM to hit the US. I also stated they would develop an ICBM that could hit the US. This was long before they tested their Hwasong-12 missile and it flew the equivalent of 10,000km, easily threatening the US mainland.


So, you argued they would never be able to hit the US with an ICBM.. not that they would never have ICBM capability (that would have been stupid as they already launched shorter range missiles). You were wrong.

How is your reading going. Did you learn anything new? Lol...

Your good memory isn't. But rejoice, you may get your nukes after all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...468314-9155-11e7-b9bc-b2f7903bab0d_story.html

As far as subs they have one, that old USSR tub and nothing on the horizon. But yes we now take NK seriously and you provide a good case for taking out your Immortal Leader and proving he's not. You just might get what you ask for.

 

[FIVR]

Your good memory isn't. But rejoice, you may get your nukes after all.

So you are seriously trying to suggest that you didn't argue with me about NK's ability to design an ICBM to hit the US? If so, I will be forced to go dig up the convo and make an even bigger fool of you. Your post makes it sound like you are trying to split the difference between calling me a liar again and admitting you were woefully misinformed (and still are) about the DPRK and its capabilities. I just need to know if you're calling me a liar. If so... I can easily prove who is really lying.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...468314-9155-11e7-b9bc-b2f7903bab0d_story.html

As far as subs they have one, that old USSR tub and nothing on the horizon. But yes we now take NK seriously and you provide a good case for taking out your Immortal Leader and proving he's not. You just might get what you ask for.

Lol. Nobody here is claiming that NK's subs are some world-beating force. Merely that they exist, and have the ability to travel to the west coast of the US. NK has already tested sub-borne IRBMs so all the sub really has to do is travel the 5000 or so miles to San Francisco. As I pointed out in the thread where we argued, submarines in 1911 had the ability to go 5000 miles. How do you possibly think that a sub which you claim yourself was built in the 50s can't do that? You are so ignorant on these issues... it's quite alarming for somebody who likes to run his mouth so much.

As for that article, so what? South Korea doesn't even have a real government. It is literally a complete US stooge, its last president had 90%+ disapproval rating and was notoriously corrupt but somehow stayed in office because she was part of the family that the US has chosen to run SK. That "defense minister" probably spends all day playing starcraft II and has no idea what a nuclear weapon does or is. His words mean nothing.

 

[Zenoth]

I'll just speculate and express my fears without having much knowledge of the subject, simply because what's going on has the obvious potential to affect the lives of basically every living beings on this planet for coming decades (if not generations to come) if it ever goes to extremes.

So, I won't pretend to fully understand how it would 'go down' like, but it sure as heck would be ugly. It'd be war, with massive scale destruction involved (well, that's the obvious part). We really don't need to analyze much on this subject. Even if the war is exclusively fought with conventional weaponry, just those North Korean artillery cannons aimed at Seoul would cause enough carnage, tens of thousands would die in South Korea. Then, there's the poor population in North Korea, outside the military, in the rural regions. Those innocents are poor, hungry and rely on eating grass, tree bark and rodents to survive. How in the great heck would they endure a war even if it's focused on and around Pyongyang? What would be the direct and indirect consequences on the millions living (rather, surviving) in North Korea? It might result in a massive post-war exodus... to where? To a possibly devastated northern region of South Korea? Seeking shelter north to China?

How about the amount of resources and logistics necessary for the post-war monitoring of the remnants of the North Korea regime to ensure no attempts at future retaliation? What about the reconstruction efforts? How much of the U.S. military will have to stay there and for how long? Will the remaining population have to live under martial law? Just to think about all of what 'might' happen, and how it would go down like makes me want to puke. There's absolutely nothing good for nobody coming out of a potential war over there.

But, ultimately, from what I think I understand is that Kim wants to provoke the U.S. (well, Trump) to fire the first shots (figuratively and literally speaking). I think that Kim probably believes that Trump, contrarily to Obama, is more susceptible to act impulsively; and because of that ever since Trump came to power Kim significantly increased the verbal provocations and the missile tests / launches. If Trump and his military advisers sort of 'fall for it', and do make a 'preemptive' strike... then I think that it would give a good reason for China to step in, in favor and defense of North Korea. In my mind, that's the biggest danger. I do think that we (the U.S. and its allies) can deal with "just" North Korea, if they're alone in the war. But if China perceives a would-be preemptive strike as nearly a threat to them as well then we're in for quite the fireworks, and it won't stay regional very long. Then, worst case scenario... what if Russia steps in to give a hand to China too? Yeah... I did say worst case scenario (that would go global and that would definitely become a definitive World War, most likely nuclear, and wouldn't last very long).

The 'best' case scenario is that Kim loses patience, that the U.S. doesn't fall for the trap and they (the North Korean regime) fires the first shot. If they do that, it gives legitimacy to the U.S. and South Korea (and other allies if they participate) to act defensively and go in without the intervention of China. It's the 'best' case scenario for the planet, but not the for region and certainly not for the South AND the North Koreans. There will be massive deaths on both sides regardless of how the U.S. military would be efficient versus the NK's. All the North Koreans need is a decent distraction, sending fake 'nuke' launches and let the interception defense systems get one or two of them and then launch the real ones to increase chances at actually hitting one or more targets (Seoul, most likely).

Bah... anyway. I don't know how it'd go down tactically and logistically speaking. But it'd be ugly, and it would impact the entire world's economy for coming years. It might also break economical ties between the U.S. and China, etc. It'd be a modern war on a scale that we would have frankly never quite seen since WW2.

 

[UglyCasanova]

http://news.sky.com/story/north-korea-moving-missile-towards-west-coast-report-11021102

NK is moving ICBM's toward their west coast where they have launch facilities.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Thanks for the detailed opinion Zenoth :beer: