Will there be a war in North Korea?

[brycejones]

I think you underestimate how much derp this administration has stockpiled. Maybe the UN should be called in to inspect it?

If we start surging significant assets to the area I will start to be concerned. Significant being redeploying Air Force wings and multiple carrier battle groups (5+). Until then it is all noise.

 

[1prophet]

So that guy who won the White House by telling people that American needed to invest in itself instead of expensive foreign wars.. is trying to start an expensive foreign war.

*Shocker*

What did you expect from a NYC limousine liberal that donned (no pun intended) conservative clothing just to win an election..

 

[vi edit]

Shortly after Trump won the election there was a thread asking what we thought his presidency would bring. I voiced concerns on health care, LGBT rights, women's health and our international standing. So far all of those have been pretty spot on. The one I refused to make a prediction on was international war. I simply had no clue on what would happen given how tenuous relationships are between various countries/regions and how fast something can go from being a hot point to an outright inferno.

I have no idea what is going to happen. There are 75 million people crammed into a peninsula the size of Utah and they pretty much hate each other and are polar opposites in terms of human rights and global interaction. It could be just a bunch more very loud saber rattling. It could be the build up to something far, far worse. I have no idea.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

There will be no war, keep your panties on.

I think you (and others) have a very, very strange idea of what War is. To me, War is using weapons to kill enemies and smash their stuff. If it's happening on your soil or the soil of your allies, it's more 'Defense' but depending on the scale, it can still be considered wartime action. If it's happening in neutral territory (the ocean) it's more of a skirmish? I guess, also subject to scale... and if it's happening in enemy territory, it's War.

 

[Sonikku]

There will be no war, keep your panties on.

NEVAR!

 

[Genx87]

I have always felt a solution to removing the NK leadership will involve military action from China. Now imagine this scenario. China removes the NK leadership via invasion. Now SK has China on its borders. Drumpf foreign policy claims success.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I have always felt a solution to removing the NK leadership will involve military action from China. Now imagine this scenario. China removes the NK leadership via invasion. Now SK has China on its borders. Drumpf foreign policy claims success.

Zero chance. The second China started massing on their eastern border, NK would rotate all their artillery west 90 degrees and we'd see one of the greatest losses of life since the London firestorms of WW2.

IF, and this is a huge, huge If... IF military action is taken against NK, it's going to be a massive alpha strike of a half dozen nations via cruise missiles, it's gonna happen in the middle of the night, and it's going to leave a lot of holes in NK.

 

[vi edit]

Zero chance. The second China started massing on their eastern border, NK would rotate all their artillery west 90 degrees and we'd see one of the greatest losses of life since the London firestorms of WW2.

IF, and this is a huge, huge If... IF military action is taken against NK, it's going to be a massive alpha strike of a half dozen nations via cruise missiles, it's gonna happen in the middle of the night, and it's going to leave a lot of holes in NK.

That's pretty much what I feel like it would be. It would be a "shock and awe" unlike anything else we've ever witnessed. I think the US would unload nearly every type of payload they can in as short of a time as they could in concerted efforts with other nations to completely level every possible hardpoint and military target they can find within minutes. It will either work and DPRK would crumble...or we'll come up short and they'll hair mary lob whatever remaining artillery and long range attacks they can muster at whatever they can until it's exhausted or destroyed.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Pretty much, that is the only way to eliminate NK as a threat. It would be a short operation but it has to be a heavy handed one. Artillery locations all along the borders have to be completely flattened, bunker busted, carpet bombed, etc. That means the intelligence on their locations have to be extensively mapped, confirmed, and reconfirmed. Strikes from cruise missiles along with backup strikes from multiple bomber squadrons will have to be carried out to ensure they are all destroyed in the first wave of attack. The NK leadership will have to be flattened as well. This would be to protect the neighbors of SK and China. Once the main threat along the borders are removed and leadership destroyed, it just remains to be vigilant of missile strikes from the interior but that is much more unlikely because NK will descend into civil war. There has always been a struggle internally, like a political civil war. That's why you see executions of high officials so often.

 

[Denly]

What I am worry is US/China using the wrong strategy, strong arm fatty into giving up nuke might back fire. We're talking about many millions of live on the line if fatty press the wrong button, and that's is without using nuke. Even if there is only 1% chance fatty will launch nuke it is still too high.

 

[DrunkenSano]

The biggest threat isn't fatty using a nuke, it's the immense conventional armament he currently has at his disposal that is aimed at South Korea. I believe that if the crazy dictator decides to use a nuke, it would be discovered and neutralized before it was any threat to our allies. Problem is, that will force everyone's hand to go full scale on NK, which is the last thing the fatty wants. The best plan for NK right now is to continue to delay any action against his country, continue to saber rattle and toe the line but not cross it, until he is able to fully develop a nuclear device and use it as a shield on the world stage. He has to learn that our current president is much less politically reliable and may make the unconventional decision, so he should lay off a bit.

 

[cytg111]

He could move that one nuke he is about to "test" closer to the chinese border ...

 

[Thump553]

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-no-one-in-korea-wants-war-2013-4?r=US&IR=T&IR=T


I don't know their source for this "often estimated" claim, but it calls into question the validity of your "more than 2 million" claim

Ironically the linked article is four years old but it's analysis and facts are still spot on.

I surely hope not. My daughter and soon to be born grandchild live in Seoul, my wife is flying there now.

With Trump it's hard to tell what is real and what is empty gas-bagging. This week he seems to be in a war mode, probably based on the self-perceived bounce in his ratings due to his missile strike publicity stunt in Syria. Will the war be there, Korea, somewhere else or will some other shiny object fascinate Trump before he actually starts a war? We already have 1,000 ground troops inside Syria (something Trump never talks about or denies) and daily bombing runs so they have first dibs in my mind. OTOH NK and Trump are a dangerous combination of fools.

 

[Jaskalas]

If we start surging significant assets to the area I will start to be concerned. Significant being redeploying Air Force wings and multiple carrier battle groups (5+). Until then it is all noise.

That's what it would take to win the war quickly and decisively.
Does not mean our leaders are intelligent enough to know this before starting a war.

 

[brycejones]

That's what it would take to win the war quickly and decisively.
Does not mean our leaders are intelligent enough to know this before starting a war.

I actually do trust the current national security team on this front. Trump is a wild card as always but an operation with idea of actually opening a conflict with NK and changing the government would require a majority of the combat air assets this country has. We don't have the f117 anymore. There are only 20 B-2s and only so many air craft already in the possible theater of operations.

There would be very strong pushback on a weak attack on the north especially with so many American ground troops in the south.

 

[cbrunny]

Really doesn't look like anything further major will happen here. CNN is barely covering it on the website.

 

[Vic]

What did you expect from a NYC limousine liberal that donned (no pun intended) conservative clothing just to win an election..

Liberals didn't vote this guy into office.

 

[brycejones]

Liberals didn't vote this guy into office.

Funny how the party of personal responsibility never takes responsibility for their cock ups.

 

[rommelrommel]

500k rounds of artillery fire within the first hour of conflict.

Go look up how far the DMZ is from Seoul, what pieces of artillery they have that can actually fire that far, and how many they have. The amount of fire they can put on Seoul is a fraction of the cited 500k. And, there is their typical dud rate (25%), the observably poor performance of their artillery units in training and previous artillery exchanges, the necessity to use some of their artillery on counterbattery fire, the need to move it constantly to avoid destruction, the need to achieve military objectives with the artillery, etc.

You simply can't level a city in a few days, it took the Russians the better part of a year to level Grozny with essentially no opposition and air supremacy. Counter battery, the air campaign, and cruise missiles would severely degrade the NK artillery in a few weeks and probably defeat it outright in a month without even invading.

However, the loss of life would still be obscene, probably 60-100k in civilians alone. Assuming no WMD's were employed.

 

[woolfe9998]

What did you expect from a NYC limousine liberal that donned (no pun intended) conservative clothing just to win an election..

Trump a "limousine liberal?" Nah. Trump doesn't believe in anything at all. That's the real scam.

His personality appeals more to conservatives than to liberals. That why he was a fake conservative instead of being a fake liberal.

 

[zinfamous]

World media would fixate entirely on the ones killed, not the ones saved.
Because the dead are countable. Potential losses.... and prevention of said losses... not so easy.

It's true, and it's why Obama never gets credit for the economic crisis that didn't happen.

Not to distract here, but I actually agree with you and werepossum there. If Trump managed to cut a deal with China that is actually somehow beneficial to the US while also getting China to corral NK, then I'd certainly welcome it.

I've no taste for more war or death, but it has only ever been a question of "when" with the DPRNK for the last ~60 years. The real problem is in securing South Korea and Japan from the inevitable fallout and casualties. I don't think this is something that Trump (well, OK: rational humans) can expect China to do unilaterally, without consent and real coordination with SK or Japan.

...which really spells out the absurdity of this speculation: there isn't a single deal Trump can make with China, related to dealing with DPRNK, that doesn't also involve SK and Japan. And, IIRC, SK is in a bit of a political and domestic bug-a-boo with their uh, "government issues" right now.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

It's true, and it's why Obama never gets credit for the economic crisis that didn't happen.

This is something that doesn't get much attention, but I feel it should. Any president (administration) we have which doesn't cause the entire union to collapse in a heap of garbage fire should at minimum be credited with that. There are so damned many plates spinning at any given time, I cannot imagine what kind of an ordeal it is to manage it all to a reasonable level while also looking like a rational person in the public eye.

Not to distract here, but I actually agree with you and werepossum there. If Trump managed to cut a deal with China that is actually somehow beneficial to the US while also getting China to corral NK, then I'd certainly welcome it.

I've no taste for more war or death, but it has only ever been a question of "when" with the DPRNK for the last ~60 years. The real problem is in securing South Korea and Japan from the inevitable fallout and casualties. I don't think this is something that Trump (well, OK: rational humans) can expect China to do unilaterally, without consent and real coordination with SK or Japan.

...which really spells out the absurdity of this speculation: there isn't a single deal Trump can make with China, related to dealing with DPRNK, that doesn't also involve SK and Japan. And, IIRC, SK is in a bit of a political and domestic bug-a-boo with their uh, "government issues" right now.

I actually have a funny feeling that very soon, China isn't going to want to leverage NK's wackiness anymore to give itself a measurement of protection from the other big nations, which it typically has done in the past. They've been ramping up economically, geo-politically, and culturally for the last few decades very quickly, and NK is going to become a heavy liability sooner rather than later. Once that happens, we'll see them starting to cut off NK's juice, before finally 'agreeing' that the modern world has no place for NK.

 

[werepossum]

now imagine if you're living in seoul.

If I lived in Seoul, obviously I'd be even more motivated to get protection for Seoul. Everything from an artillery shield (lasers and conventional point defense) up to an efficient anti-ballistic missile shield. The longer this goes on, the more insane becomes North Korean leadership, the less they have to lose, and the more likely the risk of nukes being launched onto Seoul.

 

[werepossum]

It's true, and it's why Obama never gets credit for the economic crisis that didn't happen.

Not to distract here, but I actually agree with you and werepossum there. If Trump managed to cut a deal with China that is actually somehow beneficial to the US while also getting China to corral NK, then I'd certainly welcome it.

I've no taste for more war or death, but it has only ever been a question of "when" with the DPRNK for the last ~60 years. The real problem is in securing South Korea and Japan from the inevitable fallout and casualties. I don't think this is something that Trump (well, OK: rational humans) can expect China to do unilaterally, without consent and real coordination with SK or Japan.

...which really spells out the absurdity of this speculation: there isn't a single deal Trump can make with China, related to dealing with DPRNK, that doesn't also involve SK and Japan. And, IIRC, SK is in a bit of a political and domestic bug-a-boo with their uh, "government issues" right now.

Well, one would HOPE that Trump wouldn't make a deal with China to take on North Korea without involvement and approval from South Korea and Japan, since they are in the field of fire. One never knows with Trump however.

 

[FIVR]

If I lived in Seoul, obviously I'd be even more motivated to get protection for Seoul. Everything from an artillery shield (lasers and conventional point defense) up to an efficient anti-ballistic missile shield. The longer this goes on, the more insane becomes North Korean leadership, the less they have to lose, and the more likely the risk of nukes being launched onto Seoul.

LOL conservatives and their fantasies about "point defense laser missile shields". What makes you think such things exist in any proven effective capacity? You sound like some senile old man talking about star wars. That, and you sound like a totally immoral asshole with zero ability to empathize with anyone at a different latitude and longitude.