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

[trenchfoot]

Without troops on the ground, NK is not going to capitulate, regardless of how much [conventional] bombing they get.

Capitulation wouldn't be the likely goal in my mind. It would be one of removing the nuclear threat that the DPRK represents while having Kim Jong Un unleash as little damage as possible to its neighbors.

This is where the Chinese comes into play toward making that possible.

 

[mikeymikec]

The problem is that Kim may seek immortality via the history books by lobbing some nukes. He'll go down looking like the little asshole he is, but hey... Look how we still talk about Hitler to this day.

"Immortality" in this scenario requires sacrificing his life. Most people when presented with this option versus living in luxury and getting to talk shit on a regular basis will choose the latter without hesitation. If the former was a likely option, IMO most of his staff (who also enjoy living in relative luxury compared to the general populace) would have either enlisted the aid of a foreign power to get rid of him or more likely they would arrange for him to have a peaceful heart attack in his sleep.

He could be a hero and peacefully reunify Korea...

That would require competence as a leader.

 

[sandorski]

Poorly.

 

[cytg111]

I am contemplating the geopolitical aftermath if Trump is instrumental in levelling South Korea, a close ally. Where would it all go from there?

 

[Puffnstuff]

As I watch this situation unfold it is clear to me that even Little Kim recognizes the incompetence that Trump displays and is having a good time pushing his buttons. They know better than to actually attempt a military attack on their neighbors but cannot resist watching the US under the pumpkin man's lack of leadership respond to his input.

This is just basic psychology at work; conditioned stimuli evoking a conditioned response and it works every time. Trump can't help himself and runs his mouth at every opportunity he can because he's a drama queen that loves attention.

 

[J.Wilkins]

What's changed is that the US president is now using the same language as the nutcase in NK.

It's not a smart move at all, the UN sanctions hit hard because China was on board and the smart move would be to do what has been done in the past, ignore the little idiot officially and work with other powers to resolve the situation.

Only question now is when Trump will back down and how it will effect the future of the situation.

 

[mikeymikec]

What's changed is that the US president is now using the same language as the nutcase in NK.

It's not a smart move at all, the UN sanctions hit hard because China was on board and the smart move would be to do what has been done in the past, ignore the little idiot officially and work with other powers to resolve the situation.

Only question now is when Trump will back down and how it will effect the future of the situation.

Or the rest of the world presents the two of them with this method of conflict resolution:

 

[K1052]

Well now that we've "renovated" the nuclear arsenal in 6 months time like it's the gift shop at one of his golf courses I guess we're all good. Nothing to worry about now.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Or the rest of the world presents the two of them with this method of conflict resolution:

Whoa, blast from the past.

Haven't heard that one since the mid 80's.

 

[HomerJS]

What's changed is that the US president is now using the same language as the nutcase in NK.

It's not a smart move at all, the UN sanctions hit hard because China was on board and the smart move would be to do what has been done in the past, ignore the little idiot officially and work with other powers to resolve the situation.

Only question now is when Trump will back down and how it will effect the future of the situation.

Heard Tillerson on a "scheduled" layover in Guam say why he "thinks" Trump engaged in heated rhetoric.

So I blinked twice a thought, "what do you mean he thinks, shouldn't he know?" That's pretty frightening.

We've seen this story before. Trump says something stupid or heated and the rest of the government has to back fill, walk back or correct the President. This ain't gonna go well long term unless adults in government can steer this lunatic in the right direction.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Heard Tillerson on a "scheduled" layover in Guam say why he "thinks" Trump engaged in heated rhetoric.

So I blinked twice a thought, "what do you mean he thinks, shouldn't he know?" That's pretty frightening.

We've seen this story before. Trump says something stupid or heated and the rest of the government has to back fill, walk back or correct the President. This ain't gonna go well long term unless adults in government can steer this lunatic in the right direction.

Then after every spokesperson has done their best to calm everyone down by giving a weird interpretation Trump usually comes back and says they were all wrong.

Like the reason for firing Comey, everyone was arguing that he fired Comey for being mean to Hillary and then Trump states in an interview that he fired him for not shutting down the Russia investigation.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I don't think that it will take long before we will see the results of Trump's global insults and lack of leadership.

 

[Atreus21]

Thing is... I''m not sure they have silos versus just launch pads. We know from imagery and other intel sources when they are about to do a "test" launch. NK setting up several missiles at once on pads would be a big clue and perhaps validation for a preemptive strike on the missile launch facilities... Problem is, it can't stop at one and done, once you take them out NK is going to send everything they have south anyway so you better be ready to put a stop to their initial shit storm of artillery, etc.

And in that context, nuking them might be the only way to stop them from turning Seoul to dust.

 

[Atreus21]

I am contemplating the geopolitical aftermath if Trump is instrumental in levelling South Korea, a close ally. Where would it all go from there?

Something tells me that if we get nuked, retaliate, and NK levels Seoul, that Trump will not be to blame.

 

[brycejones]

I am contemplating the geopolitical aftermath if Trump is instrumental in levelling South Korea, a close ally. Where would it all go from there?

Pretty sure the launch of the Galaxy S9 would be delayed.

 

[cytg111]

Something tells me that if we get nuked, retaliate, and NK levels Seoul, that Trump will not be to blame.

Lets say you dont get nuked, nothing is ever launched and you still move on NK and as consequence SK is obliterated... Then what?

 

[Stokely]

I don't see a lot of mention of China here. They to me are the biggest factor to take into account. Iirc they have a mutual defense pact with NK that requires them to respond if NK was nuked. WWIII in other words. Now I don't know that they would actually do this. China is probably the only country that can either threaten or otherwise defuse the situation at this point. Hopefully we are engaging them diplomatically from a standpoint of "a conflict makes us all lose", but I don't have a lot of hope for that right now.

 

[Atreus21]

Lets say you dont get nuked, nothing is ever launched and you still move on NK and as consequence SK is obliterated... Then what?

I don't mind hypotheticals, but isn't the topic of this thread explicitly that NK launches something?

 

[FIVR]

Lessons learned from the Iraq put down, improvements in tech since, planning evolution going back decades on the DPRK, the necessity for a very quick, very unexpected and very violent response the microsecond the Go Green is given etc. This is what I stressed in my previous post. If you would review the post you quoted, the scenario involved a very short and overwhelming air campaign that had nothing to do with armor and boots crossing the border, of which I mentioned our land forces would be limited to and assigned a defensive posture heavily supported by air assets.

The comments on my previous post was limited to our first strike/response capability and had nothing to do with any possible prepared set piece land battle(s) after the first strike re Iraq. Containment and denial are the key operating words in the scenario I described whereas Iraq was one of occupation. Excluding inserting the spec ops I mentioned, any large invasion by occupying land forces into the DPRK would trigger a like military response by the Chinese, therefore my scenario specifically avoided that possibility.

Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to clarify what I was hoping to describe in my previous post. :cheers:

Have you taken a good look at the performance of the US military command during its most recent operations in Iraq and Syria? Both the Manbij operation, the operation to retake falluja, and the most recent liberation of Mosul were all overseen by CENTCOM. In each and every case, the US chose to avoid deployment of large amounts of troops and resources in order to avoid casualties and to limit costs. This is smart, except the result was that ISIS (a relatively weakly armed and resourced enemy in comparison to DPRK) overran them multiple times and managed to escape encirclement with thousands of fighters despite being outnumber 10-1 and surrounded. They also managed to inflict casualties on the order of 3-1 for KIA and 10-1 for wounded. For every dead ISIS fighter in Mosul, 3 ISF died and 10 were wounded. That's an absurdly bad performance for a huge nation's army supported buy the most technically capable nation on earth's air force and commanded by that nation's high command.

I agree with you that they have learned "lessons" from Iraq, but those lessons mostly consist of "encircle smaller forces and build sand berms to stop VBIEDs" and "don't commit large forces or large resources because you might lose them" and "use lots of drones and aircraft against your weakly-protected enemies who lack sophistication". Useful lessons for battle in the Syrian and Iraqi desert, but almost useless for any sort of conflict with the DPRK, a nation that possess some 400+ jet aircraft and tens of thousands of rocket and AA artillery pieces.

I think you overestimate US abilities and underestimate the fervor that a million man army fighting on its own territory would possess. I think any sort of real "boots on the ground" invasion would take at minimum 6-12 months to prepare (you need 1 million plus troops to be moved halfway across the globe with all equipment) but even if we could magically teleport our troops there tomorrow, it would be a slaughter.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The Western war mongers are still trying to convince the masses that N. Korea is a "threat."

Just another nonsense story created to keep the war machine going. But I guess it's working because the masses are buying into this garbage.

NK is a threat. To say it isn't would be incorrect. Kim is in Trump territory as far as being rational. Remember that he isn't the originator of propaganda and his image, it was his father before him. Kim was effectively divine since birth raised to be an Eternal Leader. Daddy made him into a wack job.

But you may say Kim will never launch and while I think "never" is a very dangerous assumption let's look beyond a military reason for these weapons- blackmail. That's the likely intent. "Give me money and I won't build a bomb" becomes "Give me money or I'll nuke you". The latter is a threat that can't be taken as inconsequential. So pay up? Hope that every single time he tries this he won't actually become frustrated and say "Eff it, what the hell"?

Kim thinks no more like us than Trump does. In fact they have more in common with each other and that alone should raise concern.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Have you taken a good look at the performance of the US military command during its most recent operations in Iraq and Syria? Both the Manbij operation, the operation to retake falluja, and the most recent liberation of Mosul were all overseen by CENTCOM. In each and every case, the US chose to avoid deployment of large amounts of troops and resources in order to avoid casualties and to limit costs. This is smart, except the result was that ISIS (a relatively weakly armed and resourced enemy in comparison to DPRK) overran them multiple times and managed to escape encirclement with thousands of fighters despite being outnumber 10-1 and surrounded. They also managed to inflict casualties on the order of 3-1 for KIA and 10-1 for wounded. For every dead ISIS fighter in Mosul, 3 ISF died and 10 were wounded. That's an absurdly bad performance for a huge nation's army supported buy the most technically capable nation on earth's air force and commanded by that nation's high command.

I agree with you that they have learned "lessons" from Iraq, but those lessons mostly consist of "encircle smaller forces and build sand berms to stop VBIEDs" and "don't commit large forces or large resources because you might lose them" and "use lots of drones and aircraft against your weakly-protected enemies who lack sophistication". Useful lessons for battle in the Syrian and Iraqi desert, but almost useless for any sort of conflict with the DPRK, a nation that possess some 400+ jet aircraft and tens of thousands of rocket and AA artillery pieces.

I think you overestimate US abilities and underestimate the fervor that a million man army fighting on its own territory would possess. I think any sort of real "boots on the ground" invasion would take at minimum 6-12 months to prepare (you need 1 million plus troops to be moved halfway across the globe with all equipment) but even if we could magically teleport our troops there tomorrow, it would be a slaughter.

Boots on the ground would not work. The logistics alone forbid an effective campaign. On the other hand a MOAB on Kim's home would take care of him. But as some people finally figured out, waging war is easy. "Winning" the aftermath is not.

 

[IronWing]

Boots on the ground would not work. The logistics alone forbid an effective campaign. On the other hand a MOAB on Kim's home would take care of him. But as some people finally figured out, waging war is easy. "Winning" the aftermath is not.

As bad as the government of North Korea is, nobody wants to deal with a failed state or non-state in North Korea. I think even the Chinese are trying to figure what to do about the rabid pitbull they created. North Korea is no longer as useful to the Chinese as it once was and is now a liability to them

 

[WackyDan]

And in that context, nuking them might be the only way to stop them from turning Seoul to dust.

Except nuking them pollutes South Korea, Japan, etc...

 

[JimKiler]

The Western war mongers are still trying to convince the masses that N. Korea is a "threat."

Just another nonsense story created to keep the war machine going. But I guess it's working because the masses are buying into this garbage.

I made it to the top of page 2 before i abandoned this thread because it is dovetailing into propaganda and supposed anti propaganda speak. I am out of here. I wish i could lock the thread or delete posts like this from people who cannot follow my ground rules for the thread.

 

[HomerJS]

I find it interesting NK threatened Guam. Its debatable if their missiles can hit that target. However NK can definatly hit SK.