North Korea’s Military Strength. No Pushovers!

reply to post by Crutchley29


This.

We wouldn't face the bulk of their military unless they went a full offensive. Even then a fighting withdraw leading to an envelopment would be most likely. They would lose all power in the country, resupply would become suicidal quickly and infrastructure would be leveled. They would starving by the time their human waves could break a basic defense and then the fighting withdraw would pull them further and further from supplies while bleeding them heavily of man power and moral. By the time the envelopment came they would be broken.

The nuclear option is the only serious card they have. If they are willing to use it, they will. What are you going to do? Say sorry and surrender the world to NK because they are willing to push the button?

It would be suicide, plain and simple. Detonating a nuclear device in an offensive fashion would be the last F'n thing NK ever does. The entire world would be happy to see them crushed as completely and swiftly as possible at that point.

Although the North does have a huge amount of well trained troops... like your article said, their air force is lacking.

This is the key to any war.

Whoever gains the air advantage always wins the war.

Just take a look at World War 2: Battle of Britain, and the Battle of the Pacific- specifically Midway.

At the battle of Midway, both sides had HUGE ship armadas ready to fight, but in the end they did not even see eachother, as the entire battle was fought using planes launched from aircraft carriers.

Unless the North can defend their airspace, the US will bomb them to oblivion- not to mention with the most accurate, deadly air weapons the world has ever seen.

I mean really... if a war broke out, it would take less than a day for the US to send dozens of Jet Fighters to Japan, Hawaii, Alaska, or any other pacific base, have them re-fuelled, then unleash hell on kimmy.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Interesting perspective.
I think if the US and China stayed out of it. I feel South Korea alone could take North Korea. People tend to forget that South Korea when compared to North Korea is an Industrial Giant in their own right. Which includes and not limited to - Shipbuilding, Automobiles, Construction Equipment and Armaments. Korea's remarkable technological advancements and industrialization allowed Korea to produce increasingly more powerful military equipment.

Excellent post! But it is hypothetical to assume that if there is a conflagration in the peninsula, it would be a war between just ROK and DPRK. Since American interests would be vastly affected, it is logical to conclude that the US of A will get involved in a big way. If it does it's not only bad news for the American economy but more American soldiers than the combined RIP lists of the wars fought during the last two decades, would be killed and thousands more wounded - in a far off land that has nothing to do with the security and defense of the US of A. Remember the North doesn't have the capability or any weapon in their arsenal as of now (or in the near future) to threaten or attack mainland U.S.

The South may be an industrial giant, but will they be able to withstand the destruction by the North's conventional missiles? There would be little left after a war and it would be back to square one - the pre 50s. The South and the Americans know this. In other words, is war an option? Nope! It's going to be shadow boxing all the way.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I totally agree, but the big question is...why than do we have to continue to station troops in South Korea? Japan and South Korea's military are more than capable enough to defend themselves. Both Japan and South Korea's military have been infused with United States military technology and training since the Korean War ceasefire. Why put our troops in harms way and risk getting our country into another war that doesn't involve defending our own shores?

Originally posted by HoldTheBeans
I don't believe NK even has nuclear weapons. Just more BS spewed by their leaders all these years.

According to Jane's Defence Weekly, reports indicate that the 2006 test was a fission device with a yield of 0.55 kT. The figure of 0.55 kT, however, seems too low given the 4.2 registered on the Richter scale. This could suggest — depending upon the geological make-up of the test site — a yield of 2–12 kT.

Then in April 2009, reports surfaced that North Korea has become a "fully fledged nuclear power", an opinion shared by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei. On May 25, 2009, North Korea conducted another nuclear test, which is believed to have been the cause of a magnitude 4.7 seismic event. The test was conducted in the north-eastern region near Kilju, the site of North Korea's first nuclear test.

So it's not just all BS. However, mating a nuclear device with a delivery platform is not easy. But according to unconfirmed reports they have been successful and have now a system that's 'fully ops'.

Hello,

I have to agree with some Korean Vets I talked with years ago.....They told me of stories about coming into contact with "North Korean" forces that were actually Chinese....... they found this out after many battles, and inspecting the enemy soldiers.

Many times, the U.S. troops were in a position that was totally defensible, but the "North Koreans" just kept coming over the hill. "As if there was a gun on the other side if they didn't"

US troops (The guys I was talking to) had to piss on barrels to keep them cool because they are shooting so much at these crazies just running over the hill into an impenetrable defense..

I never knew much about the Korean war, but after talking with these guys I realized
it was a horrible situation, much worse than what was told through the media. And alot of the trouble was up to the "Puppet Master" of the north.

These guys went through some REALLY, REALLY tough stuff.

I'm just worried that the Chinese would be up to the same tricks as years ago and funnel their own "dispensable" people "Over the Hill". Plus all the politics involved in that.

Are there any Korean Vets that can confirm this?

reply to post by WeRpeons

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
in a far off land that has nothing to do with the security and defense of the US of A. Remember the North doesn't have the capability or any weapon in their arsenal as of now (or in the near future) to threaten or attack mainland U.S.

I'll direct this to both of you. I'll be writing a thread on some of the questions you both have brought up soon. Stay tuned.

In the meantime the following will have to suffice.

Last I checked both Alaska and Hawaii are both US states and while they fall in North Korea's missile range then what North Korea does becomes US business.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2f28bbc977ca.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ccca6ef94dca.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/09fbf1298608.jpg[/atsimg]
U.S. Condemns North Korean Missile Tests

The North Korean space agency released a statement saying that full preparations for launching an "experimental communications satellite" were making "brisk headway".

It said the satellite would be used for "communications, prospecting of natural resources and weather forecasting" and was "essential for the economic development of the country".

However, South Korea and the United States believe the rogue state is actually gearing up to fire the Taepodong-2 missile, the first ballistic missile that North Korea has built which is capable of striking Alaska and perhaps the West Coast of the US.

Joseph Bermudez, a leading analyst with Jane's Defence Weekly, said recent satellite imagery showed North Korea could be ready for the launch of the Taepodong-2 within a matter of days.

Very little is known about the Taepodong-2, and it is unclear whether the missile would be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

Very well laid out OP. You are right about the current capability of the NK military. However, there is absolutely no scalability and once the current stock is dwindled, there will be no replacements. There is barely enough food to feed the military while they fight. The civilians will starve, and productivity will plummet. WIthout electricity there are vast limits in the services that can be provided to the people, and I would expect that disease will begin to run amock as well.

NK would make for a great gang fight. But for any meaningful war, they are hopelessly lost with their 1980's tech.

The issue is not what North Korea has - they have their paws on some fairly interesting weaponry and capabilities. The issue is how much of it is maintained and kept in operational condition? Further, in the case of aircraft and armor/artillery - what is their ammunition stock looking like, and what condition is it in? Going from maintaining dumb-fire bombs and rockets is substantially different than maintaining anything with a practical guidance system that would be effective against present NATO aircraft and vehicles.

It is highly unlikely that a significant number of the arms they demonstrate to their people and the rest of the world are in effective serviceable numbers and could be supplied with weaponry that would be effective.

They would be pushing it simply to keep their ground forces fed, clothed, and armed - let alone supplied with ammunition and purposed munitions (anti-tank rockets, shoulder-fired SAMs, etc).

They simply do not have the facilities and logistical support to maintain such an arsenal, let alone field it.

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are pushovers, however. They do have artillery trained on Seoul and other population centers within range. To that end - they could take a toll on human life without requiring present-generation systems - and maintaining those artillery systems sits well within the logistical capability of North Korea.

However, the carrier battle group present in the region could pretty much wipe out North Korea's major infrastructure on its own without much effort.

That is the difference people don't seem to understand between wars like Afghanistan and wars like North Korea. We can shatter a command and control network of a standing army within hours - just look at the opening of the Iraq war when we were facing a standing army.

As far as "what does this have to do with us?"

I encourage you to look at your phone. LG? Samsung? What about your TV? Look at the compressor on your refrigerator (even if it's a GE, a lot of newer models have LG or samsung compressors). LG and Samsung are two absolutely massive companies coming from Korea. The gas in your car likely was delivered as oil aboard a Korean-made tanker. Their ship-building is imperative to the function of the global economy.

Also, the South Koreans generally like America - a trait that is rare among the rest of the world and we should do what we can to preserve that relationship and not leave them hanging in the wind. I encourage anyone who gets the opportunity to go to South Korea - it's about the safest place you can go to as an American. Even now, as war looms, you're safer among people who don't look at your existence as an affront to their personal views or as a way to extort ransom money or publicity. They will generally look after you as a clueless person in another country. Just remember you're the guest and that a number of things in Korea are acceptable that are not here, and vice-versa.

Abandoning South Korea is something we should never do - ever. They are one of the, if not the closest ally the U.S. has - they have fought with us in every war since the Korean conflict first broke out. They understand the free market and capitalism far better than we do (interestingly enough), and are a delight to be around - spare for the kimchi-breath.

If we had to piss off and abandon a country - we should go with a more logical choice - like Mexico or California (I know California is not a country, but - seriously, that place has become the loony bin).

I've read some very intelligent comments and some various assinine comments in this thread so far. There seem to be a large number of "experts" in this thread. I don't claim to be one. I just want to make a few points to ponder and maybe answer some questions people have.

1) US Forces on the Korean Peninsula are part of a UN mission. Over 20 nations provided soldiers to support the ROK during initial hostilities. The US provided the largest amount and still to this day have over 28K troops stationed there.

2) Saving Face or Keeping Face in Korean Culture. In Asian cultures in general things such as pride, honor, loyalty to ones family are hugely important. It leads to a very well disciplined culture who will not be easily be swayed to turn on their own. Death is preferable to dishonor or disloyalty. The North Korean soldiers are extremely dedicated to their cause so as to not lose face but also because it's all they know.

3) TERRAIN, TERRAIN, TERRAIN. and Weather. The Terrain on the Korean Peninsula especially towards the DMZ and north into the DPRK is some of the most hostile terrain in the world. Read up on places like Heartbreak Ridge, The Punch Bowl, Pork Chop Hill, and Old Baldy. Some of the mountain faces literally go straight up and straight down. Just south and north of the 38th parallel if your not going up a hill or down a hill your standing in a rice paddy. If there was a hypothetical battle for Seoul it would be long and bloody. Most on here can't fathom the size of the city. It would be fought building by building block by block. The weather changes dramatically throughout the year with extreme periods of cold and snow, monsoon season, and long periods of high humdity.

4) 50+ years to prepare for war. Countless minefields and engineer obstacles strewn throught the peninsula. Kill zones are set up virtually around every corner and in every avenue of approach. Combat Engineers on both sides would pay a heavy toll. Virtually every scenario for conflict has been wargamed to death by both sides.

5) Technology. The US/ROK side definately has the technological advantage and then some. However taken with points 2,3,& 4 above the playing field gets leveled quite a bit. It would take a while for any technological advantage to have any overall effect on the outcome of the conflict. Quite a few people in these threads on korea refer to the handling of the Iraqi Army by the US. The US fought an uninspired, undisciplined enemy in open desert. In Korea it would be far different. The terrain makes it far more difficult to hit targets with as much precision.

Well that's my two cents for now.

reply to post by Sentinel412


Great craft they are but they have not and will not over take US jets, if that were the case the people who used them would be in power, or atleast may have effectivley fought in combat, not shriveled up and died. Look at it this way if Iraq could afford Migs when they were new are they really worth it?

reply to post by OrionHunterX


Still not much to worry about its like the senior saying to the freshman "I remember my first beer"

Originally posted by mel1962
North Korea is maybe has the 20th best military in the world. South Korea has the 12th (Israel is 11th) and by the way the North Koreans are 1 behind the much vaunted Mexican Military!

Global Military Rankings

Top Five

USA
China
Russia
India
UK

When it comes to hand to hand combat and tunnel/trench warfare with extremely well indoctrinated/brainwashed troops like the North Koreans, global military rankings are of little consequence.

North Korea is the world's most-tunneled nation. North Korea's expertise in digging tunnels for warfare was demonstrated during the Vietnam War. Are you aware that North Korea had dispatched many tunnel warfare experts to Vietnam to help dig the 250 km tunnels for the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong troops in South Vietnam. The tunnels were instrumental in the Vietnamese victory.

Tunnel warfare is conducted by independent company-size units. Tunnel entrances are built to withstand US chemical and biological attacks. Tunnels run zig-zag and have seals, air-purification units, and safe places for the troops to rest. North Korea has built about 20 large tunnels near the DMZ. A large tunnel can transport approx 12000 - 15,000 troops per hour across the DMZ.

What experience do the US Forces have in tunnel warfare? Nix!

reply to post by OrionHunterX



Tunnels are nothing more than tombs. You don't need to go into a tunnel to fight the enemy, you just need to keep him from coming out. Eventually, he'll starve to death.

Sorry, triple post.

Sorry. Triple post.

Originally posted by usmc858
These guys (US troops) went through some REALLY, REALLY tough stuff.

I'm just worried that the Chinese would be up to the same tricks as years ago and funnel their own "dispensable" people "Over the Hill". Plus all the politics involved in that.

Are there any Korean Vets that can confirm this?

There would be no need for the infamous 'wave tactics' by the Chinese in Korea. They would not physically help them on ground. North Korea has enough manpower and weapons now to follow the Chinese 'wave' tactics themselves considering they have more than a million highly indoctrinated (and dispensable?) armed troops out there.

reply to post by THE-LURKER

What an excellent post!! A star for you! Well analyzed from a person who knows his beans.

Yes, terrain is going to play a vital part in any offensive op. Abrams are nice hi tech toys, but in the thousands of acres of knee deep water-filled paddy fields they'll be bogged down like sitting ducks for some nice target practice by the North Koreans! M-kills/K kills by the dozen! (Anyway, this depends upon the season for rice cultivation! ) Then of course there's the mountainous terrain to contend with! All these can safely be termed as passive force multipliers for the NKs.

Some have mentioned that air power is sufficient to win a war. This cannot be farther from the truth. The ground forces would need to hold ground and that's the problem! Even logistic support will be extremely difficult as the extended lines if communications would be vulnerable to NK's attacks using their classic hit and run tactics.

In other words this isn't going to be a cake walk!

Migs v Aim-9X good by Mig
en.wikipedia.org...

US tanks v NK tanks the US M1 abrams has already shown that the tanks used by NK are dead. iraq use the same russian made tanks. Goodbye NK tanks.
And the US has many more tank killers from shoulder launched, air dropped, to a Aim-9X sindwinder Anti-tank variant.

NK ground troops.v US CBUs
www.darkgovernment.com...
Goodby NK troops.

NK C3 command control and communications v US weapons Goodbye NK C3

NK radars V US AGM-88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) goodbye NK radars.

NK ships v US Navy anti ship missiles Goodbye NK ships.

Now would NK defend themself from everything we throw at them.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by WeRpeons

 

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
in a far off land that has nothing to do with the security and defense of the US of A. Remember the North doesn't have the capability or any weapon in their arsenal as of now (or in the near future) to threaten or attack mainland U.S.

Last I checked both Alaska and Hawaii are both US states and while they fall in North Korea's missile range then what North Korea does becomes US business.

However, South Korea and the United States believe the rogue state is actually gearing up to fire the Taepodong-2 missile, the first ballistic missile that North Korea has built which is capable of striking Alaska and perhaps the West Coast of the US.

Joseph Bermudez, a leading analyst with Jane's Defence Weekly, said recent satellite imagery showed North Korea could be ready for the launch of the Taepodong-2 within a matter of days.

Very little is known about the Taepodong-2, and it is unclear whether the missile would be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

The Taepodongs are not yet in even scaled production and have never been successfully tested. TheTaepodong-2 missile has been tested only once, on 5 July 2006 but it flew only 40 seconds when the missile disintegrated. The Taepodong-1 has been test flown only once on 31 August 1998 as a space launcher instead of a normal ballistic missile payload. It was never intended to be used as an intermediate range military missile.

According to the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), the Taepodongs are large liquid-fueled missiles. As currently configured, they are operated like space launchers, with long assembly times, and launched from fixed, above-ground launch pads. The missiles are expensive for a country as impoverished as North Korea and so unlikely to ever be produced in large numbers.

In other words NK does not have a viable counter value strike capability to threaten high value cities on mainland U.S. as of now. Worse still is perhaps its counter force capability as few of its missiles have a CEP within acceptable parameters.

However, a payload of chemical or biological agents could have a much broader effect and the accuracy of the missile is far less critical. But then, both South Korean and U.S. Forces are well protected against chemical and biological attack. And therefore the effect of North Korean counter force strikes would be rather limited.