Originally posted by utherpendragon A whole different set of circumstances from 1950 to 2010
I see no more willingness from the Chinese government now than there was then to accept a victorious US army overrunning a neighboring nation and pushing to the Yalu. I would rate the chance of Chinese intervention if the US goal was regime change in N. Korea as near 100%. That's if the US could field a sizable enough field army to rapidly defeat the North Koreans which, given our other global commitments, is highly doubtful.
Originally posted by utherpendragon What scenario are we talking about fmf? First you said no nukes and now its nukes!
You seem to be talking about a scenario where the U.S. invades the North, where China does not intervene. My question is do you imagine that the N.Koreans, in the event of such an invasion by the U.S. and others, would succeed in hitting targets in South Korea and Japan with nuclear warheads?
Originally posted by no1marauder That's what McArthur thought until the Chinese handed the US its worst military defeat in modern history in November 1950.
That's really some comparison...We have what 10 nuc subs patroling the oceans now, with number 11 nearly completed,, we could do alot more with them, than we did with Old Mo.
Air power would wipe out most if not all of their warning systems on the first day.
China has nothing at sea to compare with our navy.
ROK proved themselves to be bloodthirsty killers in Vietnam. I have no reason to think they are not still top notch.
North Korean done,, if they stir up the pot
Originally posted by no1marauder I see no more willingness from the Chinese government now than there was then to accept a victorious US army overrunning a neighboring nation and pushing to the Yalu. I would rate the chance of Chinese intervention if the US goal was regime change in N. Korea as near 100%. That's if the US could field a sizable enough field army to rapidly defeat the North Koreans which, given our other global commitments, is highly doubtful.
The U.S. could easily handle N.Korea tomarrow. As I said earlier we could destroy them w/our Navy alone. I am not talking about a regime change. I am talking about a retalliation from another attack on their part. If it got down to regime changes I could see China getting involved and making deals w/the west on this.
Originally posted by utherpendragon The U.S. could easily handle N.Korea tomarrow. As I said earlier we could destroy them w/our Navy alone. I am not talking about a regime change. I am talking about a retalliation from another attack on their part. If it got down to regime changes I could see China getting involved and making deals w/the west on this.
That's nonsense. The North Korean Army has 1.2 million men under arms, about 10,000 artillery pieces and 2000 tanks with an extensive array of anti-aircraft capabilities. 70% of their forces are deployed within a days march of the DMZ. This ain't Serbia; if they struck forward tomorrow ROK would be hard pressed to hold the line. Destroying this force in any significant degree by our Navy alone is a fantasy.
EDIT: I'm assuming our Navy isn't using nuclear weapons.
Originally posted by no1marauder That's nonsense. The North Korean Army has 1.2 million men under arms, about 10,000 artillery pieces and 2000 tanks with an extensive array of anti-aircraft capabilities. 70% of their forces are deployed within a days march of the DMZ. This ain't Serbia; if they struck forward tomorrow ROK would be hard pressed to hold the line. Destroying this force in ...[text shortened]... by our Navy alone is a fantasy.
EDIT: I'm assuming our Navy isn't using nuclear weapons.
They haven't got food to feed their troops or fuel to move all those tanks and artillery pieces. Their first strike at the DMZ if a surprise could be devastating, but they have no answer to the array of killing machines in the US arsenal of conventional weapons.
Originally posted by no1marauder That's nonsense. The North Korean Army has 1.2 million men under arms, about 10,000 artillery pieces and 2000 tanks with an extensive array of anti-aircraft capabilities. 70% of their forces are deployed within a days march of the DMZ. This ain't Serbia; if they struck forward tomorrow ROK would be hard pressed to hold the line. Destroying this force in ...[text shortened]... by our Navy alone is a fantasy.
EDIT: I'm assuming our Navy isn't using nuclear weapons.
I know it aint serbia. Its a peninsula! sitting ducks! They would get the living crap bombed out of them from our Navy plus relentless air strikes. Their nation is in shambles and starving already. I highly doubt they could hold out. They dont have the resources to fight a all out war for any extended period of time.
If they ever did attempt a nuke attack it would be folly. Then the gloves are off. What do we have 1500 or so nukes in our arsenal?
China will not stand by and let N.Korea start WW3 at their doorstep. They surely would join in to end them.
Originally posted by FMF You think the U.S. or the S. Koreans finding a N. Korean ship and sinking it would stop N.Korea? Stop them from what?
Further threats of agression and agression. When you get away with something, you are emboldened to push a bit farther. Non response is most often taken for weakness and lack of resolve.
Originally posted by normbenign Further threats of agression and agression. When you get away with something, you are emboldened to push a bit farther. Non response is most often taken for weakness and lack of resolve.
Originally posted by normbenign Further threats of agression and agression. When you get away with something, you are emboldened to push a bit farther. Non response is most often taken for weakness and lack of resolve.
So the current U.S./R.O.K. joint military exercises is a "non-response [that might be] taken for weakness and lack of resolve" in your view?
Originally posted by Hugh Glass It's not real clear to me how many they have. Does anyone know?
I think we have 47K troops there now?
I think we could bomb them in to the stone age in a week though.
You're right, it would be bloody though, I wouldn't want to call the shots.
Humans are quite capable of being a threat even if they have no technology. Populations do not disappear, and they don't forget. Israel has been nursing a grudge for ~5000 years now and they're still shooting people over it.
Originally posted by Hugh Glass That's really some comparison...We have what 10 nuc subs patroling the oceans now, with number 11 nearly completed,, we could do alot more with them, than we did with Old Mo.
Air power would wipe out most if not all of their warning systems on the first day.
China has nothing at sea to compare with our navy.
ROK proved themselves to be bloodthirsty kil ...[text shortened]... e no reason to think they are not still top notch.
North Korean done,, if they stir up the pot
North Korea has possibly the most elaborate fortifications in the history of mankind. Once we've wiped the surface clean there's much more we can do. Fifty years from now some NorK fanatic will sneak a nuke into San Diego and wipe out the city because of our terror bombing.
Yes, everyone knows that the Anglos are the best killers in the world. That's not enough though! Every time they think brutality will do the job they end up with a bloody nose. Yeah, the other guy is brain damaged and crippled, but that just gives him and his brothers, sons, nephews, father etc more hatred to nurse while they wait for the chance to strike.
North korea threatens nukes
25 Jul '10 02:37
Back to Top