How would the US theoretically react to an attempted missile by North Korea

[JimKiler]

The hypothesize how the US would react to:

1. a missile launch by North Korea targeting the US that we shoot down without casualties.

2. a missile launch that strikes the US and kills some US citizens.

Given North Korea is so close to South Korea and they are an ally would be we bomb them in either scenario. I don't know enough about bombs, is there enough distance to set off an atomic bomb? But again that will kill so many North Korea citizens would the US have the appetite for that? in scenario 1 i would say no, but would we in scenario 2?

If this dovetails into a political argument i am going to dovetail out of this thread so fast and since this is theoretical lets not speculate based on who or which party is in charge but more generally.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Within 24 hours, we'd probably shove a deep impactor/bunker buster type warhead into each known missile site, as well as a few dozen targetted cruise missiles on important military targets across the continent, and apologize to the people of South Korea for costing them Seoul, and the parents of a few thousand soldiers stationed there for the loss of their children.

 

[IronWing]

I think in either scenario of such an attack, the U.S. would announce that the North Korean weapons program will be dismantled. We might allow China the option of being the party to ensure its prompt destruction but in no case do I see the U.S. allowing the program's continued existence.

 

[FIVR]

1. Fictional fantasy scenario. 1 in 1,000,000,000 or less probability.
Consequences: dozen or so Nuclear warheads rain down on all of North korea's cities. Millions of casualties.


2. Full nuclear retaliation and end of civilized world. Hundreds of warheads are launched in search of every possible underground silo and turn the DPRK into a nuclear wasteland unfit for habitation for the next thousand years.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Given the location, our fear of pissing off China and our ties to SK we would probably not nuke them. We'd park a couple of carriers off the coast and rain conventional weapons on every square inch of the country for weeks until there was nothing left but rubble.

 

[ddogg]

If #2 happens I'd imagine we would bomb them out of existence using non nuclear bombs. Would be sad as there would be a lot of innocent casualties.

 

[WackyDan]

1. We should be parking every anti ballistic missile system we have - Land based, ship, based, etc nearby and simply use their missile launches as true tests of the technology and simply be quiet about it... "Oh NK, you lost another missile? Keep trying buddy!"...

2. A successful launch and targeting of US territory or that of an ally would send the world into chaos. Markets would collapse etc. That is even before calculating the cost of human lives and infrastructure where ever the nuke hits.

3. It could be the first time since WWII that we see the U.S. actually declare war.

4. It would also be a test of the U.N.

5. I don't see our response being a nuclear one. The Russians and the Chinese would have their DEFCON type readiness on a hair trigger. That said, we have long maintained that weapons of mass destruction will be met with the same response. I don't think we have the appetite for using anything big other than small yield tactical nukes.

6. Either way... The US goes it alone or with NATO or as a U.N. sanctioned war. We take out NK's command and control systems, take out their ability to use anti air defenses and own their skies. The same can be said for owning their navy.

A lot of hype is made about NK's 1,000,000 man army, but it is highly doubtful that they have the ability to sustain a war for any length of time. The Korean war was fought with technology primarily from WWII with the exception of better radar, and more jets.... Today, NK would have to withstand precision munitions, stealth aircraft, etc. It would be horrible for South Korea, but North Korea would probably fold within several weeks of the conflict fully escalating from combined efforts of NATO.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

several weeks

I feel your predictions on timeline are rather .. generous. Anything involving NK would be over in a matter of days at most to minimize casualties to SK. Hell, China would probably step in regardless of the pace just to end it faster to avoid any failed nuclear launches causing fallout in their direction. Nobody wants that hot potato.

 

[Stokely]

You didn't say whether their missile was conventional or nuclear (the latter would assume they had a small-enough warhead).

I think there's a very good chance our response would be military in nature, and either overwhelming conventional force or a nuclear strike depending on what hit us. Ideally this would involve China and the world in general. It's a global economy and we all sink or swim in this together (despite all the "America first" bullshit and the equivalent elsewhere....)

 

[cytg111]

either case the same outcome. no nuclear retaliation but still total obliviation of NK through conventional bombing... It will be an example of "you thought that was bad, then you should see our nukes" kind of thing.

 

[jackstar7]

Probably at least a couple Purges here in the U.S.

People don't need much reason to panic and abandon all trappings of civilization.

 

[MajinCry]

There'd be a whole lot of murder and rape by the US (i.e, war), if the whole 9/11 idiocy was to be repeated.

 

[Atreus21]

1. We should be parking every anti ballistic missile system we have - Land based, ship, based, etc nearby and simply use their missile launches as true tests of the technology and simply be quiet about it... "Oh NK, you lost another missile? Keep trying buddy!"...

I like this idea.

2. A successful launch and targeting of US territory or that of an ally would send the world into chaos. Markets would collapse etc. That is even before calculating the cost of human lives and infrastructure where ever the nuke hits.

3. It could be the first time since WWII that we see the U.S. actually declare war.

4. It would also be a test of the U.N.

Agree.

5. I don't see our response being a nuclear one. The Russians and the Chinese would have their DEFCON type readiness on a hair trigger. That said, we have long maintained that weapons of mass destruction will be met with the same response. I don't think we have the appetite for using anything big other than small yield tactical nukes.

I dunno. In this scenario one would expect NK to launch everything they got since they've got nothing to lose now. In fact, I begin to wonder if this scenario, NK launching a single missile, is sensible. If they launch one they may as well launch everything, assuming they have the capability, since the response might well be the same either way.

6. Either way... The US goes it alone or with NATO or as a U.N. sanctioned war. We take out NK's command and control systems, take out their ability to use anti air defenses and own their skies. The same can be said for owning their navy.

A lot of hype is made about NK's 1,000,000 man army, but it is highly doubtful that they have the ability to sustain a war for any length of time. The Korean war was fought with technology primarily from WWII with the exception of better radar, and more jets.... Today, NK would have to withstand precision munitions, stealth aircraft, etc. It would be horrible for South Korea, but North Korea would probably fold within several weeks of the conflict fully escalating from combined efforts of NATO.

Agree.

I mean this sincerely - I worry for the people of Los Angeles.

 

[bshole]

There'd be a whole lot of murder and rape by the US (i.e, war), if the whole 9/11 idiocy was to be repeated.

I dunno, can you imagine if LA was hit a nuke from North Korea. At that exact moment it becomes a matter of survival. Hit LA, NYC and Washington DC and it would take decades for America to recover. Tens of millions of Americans would die.

If you like your fear mongering pegged, check this out...

A new report from the U.K.-based Global Challenges Foundation urges us to take them seriously. The nonprofit began its annual report on “global catastrophic risk” with a startling provocation: If figures often used to compute human extinction risk are correct, the average American is more than five times likelier to die during a human-extinction event than in a car crash.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/04/a-human-extinction-isnt-that-unlikely/480444/

 

[aigomorla]

1. full mobilization, however before that even happens, China + Russia will most likely take over NK, because the last thing they want is for america to have a reason to be right at their border.

2. Russia + China will ground stomp NK so hard that not even a blade of grass is standing, and tell America, look we stomped them so hard they wont be able to get up again ever... so u dont need to park all your high tech weapons at our border.

The last thing Russia and China want is our troops at the border.
Especially since we rank first in logistics and can support and maintain it.

So Russia and China will give us a reason not to be there, by cutting off the head of the snake before we can.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Probably invade Iran.

 

[Linux23]

so no perfect option then? check.

 

[Homerboy]

I'm going to go with "They will be met with fire, fury and, frankly, power the likes of which the world has never seen before."

 

[FIVR]

Sweet. We're gonna get nuked. I never thought i'd get nuked, but now I'm kinda thinking it might be a cool way to go.

 

[FIVR]

Actually I just read up on it, and it's not that cool of a way to go. Unless you're incinerated in the fireball or destroyed by the shockwave or flying debris instantly, it looks like it gets pretty gruesome. The descriptions from hiroshima describe people completely devoid of skin without eyes, but still alive and walking around aimlessly for days.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions

 

[Jaskalas]

If North Korea attempted or successfully struck us, we would assuredly go weapons hot into a war. If they used nukes, we would be forced to uphold MAD and return the favor to them.

 

[Stokely]

Sweet. We're gonna get nuked. I never thought i'd get nuked, but now I'm kinda thinking it might be a cool way to go.

I'm old enough to remember seeing "The Day After" as a kid. Pretty much had me hiding under chairs waiting for Soviet missiles to fall.

Better to be hit directly than suffer the radiation and fallout.

 

[MajinCry]

I dunno, can you imagine if LA was hit a nuke from North Korea. At that exact moment it becomes a matter of survival. Hit LA, NYC and Washington DC and it would take decades for America to recover. Tens of millions of Americans would die.

If you like your fear mongering pegged, check this out...



https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/04/a-human-extinction-isnt-that-unlikely/480444/

Keep overthrowing democracy and invading other countries, and there's bound to be one that'll fight back. I'd be a bit thrown off if that statistic was for the Finnish, but not Americans.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

There's no reason to launch on North Korea if we don't saturate launch on China at the same time. 1st option is always to let China take care of their own fskimup.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

There's no reason to launch on North Korea if we don't saturate launch on China at the same time. 1st option is always to let China take care of their own fskimup.

No, we'd want to take care of business ourselves. We didn't let somebody else lead the charge to find Bin-Laden. If we were going to nuke NK we'd talk to China first though just to make sure they knew exactly what we were doing.

This is kind of like planning what to do in the event of a unicorn uprising threatening the democratically elected government of Atlantis. NK is not going to nuke us or anyone else either. NK is like a toy chihuahua yapping at bigger dogs from a safe hiding place behind the couch. It likes making a lot of noise to sound tough, but it's never going to stick its head out where it might get bitten off.