North Korea Now Making Missile Ready Nuclear Weapons

[vorlon13]

Presumably anyone close to Un who's a personal threat to him has already been executed with an anti-aircraft round to the torso.



Un's version is less mess around the gun, a plus if you have several to do.

[Jehanne]

If we attack them, then China will defend, which means that they will attack Us.

China will not defend North Korea from just any attack.  They will only defend North Korea to prevent it from collapsing and merging with South Korea or become occupied by US forces.

If the regime collapse is brought about by means other than land invasion by the US or South Korea, there is not necessarily any large amount of room for armed conflict between the US and china even if the Chinese does intervene militarily in Korea.

The first major step of their intervention is unlikely to involve start shooting at the US.  Rather they will likely deploy their air and ground assets into northern parts of North Korea, declare it off limits to the US, and dare the US to shoot at them first.

It's unlikely events will simply go out of control and the conflict escalate by itself into a way between the US and china.  Rather both sides will have to specifically want that conflict for the conflict to occur.  Either side can attain its own core objective while offering the other side opportunity to climb down without embrassement.

Of course we do have trump.  But.....

I don't believe in crystal balls; no one knows, for sure, what will happen if war breaks out between the US & China.  Russia may decide to get involved and simply launch a first strike.  It's difficult to tell.  Besides, people on this board and elsewhere believe that the United States can steam-roll over North Korea as we did in Iraq, and I don't think that such is even something that professional war analysts would consider realistic, and of course, their information is, for the most part, completely classified.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's the assessment of literally everyone on earth -except- N. Korea's propoganda machine, Jeh.

Hell, IDK where you even got the idea that Iraq had anything less than a modern air defense and professional army. What professional analysts consider unrealistic is not that N. Korea would be crushed with relative ease, but that we could do it without leading to the devastation of Seoul.

[Brian37]

China will not defend North Korea from just any attack.  They will only defend North Korea to prevent it from collapsing and merging with South Korea or become occupied by US forces.

If the regime collapse is brought about by means other than land invasion by the US or South Korea, there is not necessarily any large amount of room for armed conflict between the US and china even if the Chinese does intervene militarily in Korea.

The first major step of their intervention is unlikely to involve start shooting at the US.  Rather they will likely deploy their air and ground assets into northern parts of North Korea, declare it off limits to the US, and dare the US to shoot at them first.

It's unlikely events will simply go out of control and the conflict escalate by itself into a way between the US and china.  Rather both sides will have to specifically want that conflict for the conflict to occur.  Either side can attain its own core objective while offering the other side opportunity to climb down without embrassement.

Of course we do have trump.  But.....

I don't believe in crystal balls; no one knows, for sure, what will happen if war breaks out between the US & China.  Russia may decide to get involved and simply launch a first strike.  It's difficult to tell.  Besides, people on this board and elsewhere believe that the United States can steam-roll over North Korea as we did in Iraq, and I don't think that such is even something that professional war analysts would consider realistic, and of course, their information is, for the most part, completely classified.

No I think while some here have a Dirty Harry we will win attitude, most here realize that North Korea is not Iraq or Afghanistan. If we go to war with them, even without a nuclear war, it will be far more bloody. But the risk of WW3 and a nuclear war is far greater this time.

If China gets involved against us the only thing that would prevent a nuclear war is if both sides agree not to use them. Nukes existed in the last Korean war, but this time I don't think you can assume Un or Trump understand what mutual destruction means.

[Thumpalumpacus]

[Emphasis added -- Thump]

This really is not the case. Their armored forces and air force both field weapons systems that are largely forty or more years out of date -- T-55s, and a couple of locally-developed variants on the T-62 chassis, MiG-21s and-23/27s reinforced by a smattering of MiG 29s (about 40, if I recall correctly).  

DPRK forces are in no sense of the term "completely modern".

If we attack them, then China will defend, which means that they will attack Us.

It's a good thing I'm not advocating for attacking them then, don't you think?

I'm only speaking to military facts. I'm not advocating any policy. But since you seem willing to impute views on me, I'll clarify my position: I don't think we should attack DPRK.

However, if they attack us, the military facts will weigh in the balance. I only attempt here to insert those facts int this conversation. Their military strength looks decent if you look at raw numbers, but only a fool does that when measuring military strength.

They field a largely obsolete military and while they might force a big fight they will not come out ahead. And if they launch a first strike, will China defend them?

[Jehanne]

That's the assessment of literally everyone on earth -except- N. Korea's propoganda machine, Jeh.

Hell, IDK where you even got the idea that Iraq had anything less than a modern air defense and professional army.  What professional analysts consider unrealistic is not that N. Korea would be crushed with relative ease, but that we could do it without leading to the devastation of Seoul.

Most of Iraq's soldiers were irregulars; that's one reason why they were so easily defeated.  Also, many of the professional soldiers despised Saddam Hussein, which is why he would not allow them within the city limits of Baghdad for fear of a coup.  Indeed, many of the Iraqi air-force defected to Iran before the shooting ever started!!

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's the assessment of literally everyone on earth -except- N. Korea's propoganda machine, Jeh.

Hell, IDK where you even got the idea that Iraq had anything less than a modern air defense and professional army.  What professional analysts consider unrealistic is not that N. Korea would be crushed with relative ease, but that we could do it without leading to the devastation of Seoul.

Most of Iraq's soldiers were irregulars; that's one reason why they were so easily defeated.  Also, many of the professional soldiers despised Saddam Hussein, which is why he would not allow them within the city limits of Baghdad for fear of a coup.  Indeed, many of the Iraqi air-force defected to Iran before the shooting ever started!!

What makes you think DPRK regulars would be more loyal? Would you be willing to fight to the death for a regime that starves your cousins? Would you do that much?

Soldiers are not robots. They have to have a reason to fight. Unit loyalty will give them coherence in a tactical situation, but once the shit hits the fan, even that is often traded for intact skin and home with the family.

Those same Iraqis you disparage went over the top in trench warfare rivalling the ferocity seen on the Western Front in 1916. And no doubt the NoKor foot soldier will fight hard, too ... on short rations, knowing that family members back home will be punished for any dereliction on his part. But that is not a good recipe for an efficient combat machine. Don't take my word for it; look up the history of NKVD divisions on the Eastern Front in WWII, prodding the Soviet infantry forward with threats of the GULag and "11 grams". Indoctrination on goes so far.

Regarding the Iraqi air force, they point up the above aspect of combat civilians rarely understand: weapons are only as good as the men who wield them. Give me a good man with a bayonet over a weak man with an AK any day of the week.

[Court Jester]

North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles, crossing a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment.
The new analysis completed last month by the Defense Intelligence Agency comes on the heels of another intelligence assessment that sharply raises the official estimate for the total number of bombs in the communist country’s atomic arsenal. The U.S. calculated last month that up to 60 nuclear weapons are now controlled by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Some independent experts believe the number of bombs is much smaller.
The findings are likely to deepen concerns about an evolving North Korean military threat that appears to be advancing far more rapidly than many experts had predicted. U.S. officials last month concluded that Pyongyang is also outpacing expectations in its effort to build an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking cities on the American mainland.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...a3a3a1426b

Those wussies are 100% talk and bluster. I'd kinda like to see them lob one though. It wouldn't far, and would finally lead to the end.

[Jehanne]

Most of Iraq's soldiers were irregulars; that's one reason why they were so easily defeated.  Also, many of the professional soldiers despised Saddam Hussein, which is why he would not allow them within the city limits of Baghdad for fear of a coup.  Indeed, many of the Iraqi air-force defected to Iran before the shooting ever started!!

What makes you think DPRK regulars would be more loyal? Would you be willing to fight to the death for a regime that starves your cousins?  Would you do that much?

Soldiers are not robots. They have to have a reason to fight. Unit loyalty will give them coherence in a tactical situation, but once the shit hits the fan, even that is often traded for intact skin and home with the family.

Those same Iraqis you disparage went over the top in trench warfare rivalling the ferocity seen on the Western Front in 1916. And no doubt the NoKor foot soldier will fight hard, too ... on short rations, knowing that family members back home will be punished for any dereliction on his part.  But that is not a good recipe for an efficient combat machine. Don't take my word for it; look up the history of NKVD divisions on the Eastern Front in WWII, prodding the Soviet infantry forward with threats of the GULag and "11 grams". Indoctrination on goes so far.

Regarding the Iraqi air force, they point up the above aspect of combat civilians rarely understand: weapons are only as good as the men who wield them. Give me a good man with a bayonet over a weak man with an AK any day of the week.

They fought tooth & nail 60 years ago; what has changed since then?

[bennyboy]

That's the assessment of literally everyone on earth -except- N. Korea's propoganda machine, Jeh.

Hell, IDK where you even got the idea that Iraq had anything less than a modern air defense and professional army.  What professional analysts consider unrealistic is not that N. Korea would be crushed with relative ease, but that we could do it without leading to the devastation of Seoul.

Yep, and one possibly less AF member-- but maybe one of the more annoying ones, eh?

I'd put it this way-- might cannot prevent spite, and there's nothing preventing N. Korea from doing great harm to the South in the case of an attack-- there just isn't.  There's no way to organize a first strike to get even 10% of the artillery, tanks, missile launchers etc. that are capable of hitting Seoul.

The question isn't whether America CAN beat N. Korea, and in a very decisive fashion.  Of course you can.  The question is who's going to make the call?  Who's going to go down as the asshole whose decision caused the almost immediate deaths of maybe a million or more allies, and a lot of own-citizens as well, without a clear and direct act of war from the enemy?

Well, I guess we know the answer to that, don't we? But I don't think even the Donald wants that kind of fame.

---

Most of Iraq's soldiers were irregulars; that's one reason why they were so easily defeated.  Also, many of the professional soldiers despised Saddam Hussein, which is why he would not allow them within the city limits of Baghdad for fear of a coup.  Indeed, many of the Iraqi air-force defected to Iran before the shooting ever started!!

The geography was hugely different as well. Straight desert roads with lines of tanks, and the US with the best bombers in the world!

This is very different from N. Korea, with maybe 90% of their mid-range weaponry embedded in caves and mountains, already within strike range of Seoul without having to move more than maybe 100 yards.

---

What makes you think DPRK regulars would be more loyal? Would you be willing to fight to the death for a regime that starves your cousins?  Would you do that much?

Soldiers are not robots. They have to have a reason to fight. Unit loyalty will give them coherence in a tactical situation, but once the shit hits the fan, even that is often traded for intact skin and home with the family.

First of all, the Kim family have been venerated as gods for three generations now, and they have had a pretty much unchanging world view during that time. In Iraq's case, Saddam was propped up within memory of many of the soldiers, and their relationship with the US was in a lot more flux. If anyone doesn't think the N. Korean soldiers have absolute faith and loyalty toward their leadership, I think you might underestimate the power of that level of brainwashing.

But I do have a question related to yours. Could N. Korea ever have boots on the ground in Seoul? It seems to me that Seoul is so much more advanced and generally grand than Pyeong Yang that just being there would immediately render everything they were taught about their country a lie. I mean, just across the street from me there's a 70-story apartment with a neon-outlined helicopter landing pad on top-- well, technically there are 4 of them, but they are part of the same complex. How does a N. Korean see something like that and not just break down right away?