North Korea's Military Capabilities

[Varanid]

And of course if there's a marked technological advantage it will trump pilot skill. But such a large disparity in technological capability doesn't happen all that often.

Bolding mine.

I know nothing of pilots and aircraft, but as a paradigm this is true. Further, isn't this the entire point of technology?

 

[Delvo]

And of course if there's a marked technological advantage it will trump pilot skill. But such a large disparity in technological capability doesn't happen all that often.

And that's why I brought up the technological levels of the hypothetical participants. Depending on which countries are involved, there are different answers to the question of whether one side or another has such a large technological advantage.

NK has about twice as many fighters as SK, in an oddly wide variety of models up to some Mig 29s but all the way down from there to barely-post-WWII models equivalent to a North American Sabre (P-86/F-86) or Mig 15, planes which, even if they weren't getting shot at at all, would still never even get a chance to try to shoot at any of the other planes I'll be talking about here anyway just because of differences in speed and such. Compared to SK, that leaves their average not very good, their really good ones outnumbered, and their training process and tactical planning considerations a scattered mess.

SK does have a bunch of F-4s and F-5s, models which the USA used as far back as the Vietnam war, but nothing older, and even the USA didn't retire its last F-4s until the 1990s. Also, SK's F-5s are about to be retired in favor of a cheap but more modern locally-made lightweight, and about half of their total force is already F-16s and F-15s, more of which are still on the way. With this kind of technological edge, SK couldn't lose if all of their pilots flew drunk.

They're even considering getting some F-35s, although I think they're more likely to go for F-15SEs instead due to costs. (That's "Silent Eagle", a version of F-15 that's mostly made like any other F-15, but is tweaked here and there to make it lighter & more fuel efficient and reduce radar signature, and is covered with stealth coating, and cleverly replaces the add-on conformal fuel tanks with conformal enclosed missile bays.)

Once they have either of those latter two a few years from now, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that SK actually makes the first strike, with a sneak attack on the artillery sites NK has pointed south. (Why were those ever allowed to be built, anyway?)

SK's better Air Force then neutralizes NK's size advantage on the ground by hitting ground forces from the air (including not just blowing up the vehicles or roads but also hitting infantry on foot with anti-personnel weapons like cluster bombs).

But that's all if the war remains entirely Korean. I don't expect China or Russia to get involved at first because they don't have a lot of stake in NK. But if the USA gives in to temptation to help SK make it easier and faster, or even if one American base over there somehow gets involved without planning or trying to, then the two Asian heavyweights will want to counter the American interference. (This gives NK an incentive to attack Americans just to try to get the USA and its adversaries involved so it doesn't have to fight SK alone.)

And that tips the technological comparison back the other way, at least for now. Those two countries have (and can still produce) a much larger number of a mix of Mig and Sukhoi fighters with model numbers in the upper 20s and lower 30s, plus Chengdu J-10s. All of those planes are at least rivals to our "teen" planes that are currently based there, and some are distinctly a step above. And even if you figure our pilots are better than the Chinese and Russian pros, you also have to consider how many can be sent and how much support infrastructure there is nearby: for us it's halfway around the world, but for them, especially China, the whole thing is essentially local. That not only helps them use their jets more effectively but also means they can send ground stuff on the ground. So if China (or Russia) fights, or even sends their planes (and/or other hardware) for NK to use, there's nothing we could do for SK for now. (Same as Taiwan.) The only way we could have a chance would require large numbers of F-22s and F-35s and the base capacity to operate large numbers of them over there, which isn't going to happen soon.

 

[WildCat]

Though it was definitely ballsy on behalf of the Chinese, if they had been noticed I wonder how quickly this could have gotten ugly.

How do you know they weren't noticed? Why would the US Navy let them know they were noticed? Better to let them think they weren't.

I'm not saying I know this is the case, but I do think the US Navy would react the same whether they noticed them or not.

 

[Skwinty]

Thanks for proving that, yes, you DID miss the point.

When I opened your link I saw Grenada being used as an example of war.
I did not read the page. My bad.

Perhaps if you had used a smilie of some description to indicate your parody, I would have viewed it differently.

When the invasion took place, it was not considered to be a parody, nor was it considered a war.

It was considered a flagrant transgression of international law.

Yeah, that's REAL relevant to the American experience of war.

The American armed forces played a huge role in the downfall of Hitler, so in some respect it is relevant.

My comments in this thread really have to do with the perception that any war undertaken by the West will be a cake walk.

History has shown this to be a false perception. If we ignore history, then it should not be a surprise when history repeats itself.

If a nation goes to war, then it is prudent to consider experience from past wars.

Lets for arguments sake say that the West goes to war with North Korea because NK attacks SK.

North Korea sees a hiding second to none on the cards because allied forces are assisting SK.

NK then drops a dirty nuclear bomb on the south and its allies. The bomb does not have to be delivered by means of an missile, just dropped from an aircraft.

What is the next step, world peace?

Cake walk , my donkey.

Hitler also thought that his blitzkrieg would be a cake walk.

 

[dtugg]

NK then drops a dirty nuclear bomb on the south and its allies. The bomb does not have to be delivered by means of an missile, just dropped from an aircraft.

What is the next step, world peace?

Cake walk , my donkey.

Hitler also thought that his blitzkrieg would be a cake walk.

Assuming that NK could manage to get a bomber to SK without getting shot down (lol fat chance), then a few people die (dirty bombs aren't that deadly) and NK precedes to get one of the most epic beat downs in history.

Destroying NK's military would be a cakewalk. Just like whooping Saddam's ass (twice) was. An occupation might be a little messy, and hopefully if it came to that, the US would leave that part to the South.

 

[Skwinty]

Number of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 5873

These figures are only for these 2 operations.

http://militarytimes.com/valor/

I am sure the families of the thousands of dead Americans will take exception to the "cake walk" description.

 

[dtugg]

Number of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 5873

These figures are only for these 2 operations.

http://militarytimes.com/valor/

I am sure the families of the thousands of dead Americans will take exception to the "cake walk" description.

Kicking Saddam's ass was most certainly a cakewalk both times. Sure, after he got his ass kicked the second time, insurgents/terrorists caused problems, but that is a separate issue.

 

[Skwinty]

Kicking Saddam's ass was most certainly a cakewalk both times. Sure, after he got his ass kicked the second time, insurgents/terrorists caused problems, but that is a separate issue.

The loss of American/coalition lives in the "kicked Saddam's ass twice cake walk" also runs into thousands, so the same applies.

I just think it is a bit insensitive to trivialise the death of so many people, not to mention the lives of the enemy.

If my family members had been killed in action, I would resent the "cake walk" dismissal of their death.

Just my opinion as a human being with compassion.

 

[dtugg]

The loss of American/coalition lives in the "kicked Saddam's ass twice cake walk" also runs into thousands, so the same applies.

I just think it is a bit insensitive to trivialise the death of so many people, not to mention the lives of the enemy.

If my family members had been killed in action, I would resent the "cake walk" dismissal of their death.

Just my opinion as a human being with compassion.

The vast majority were killed by terrorists after Saddam got his beatdown.

Kicking Saddam's ass was easy. The subsequent occupation not so much.

Kicking Kim Jong Il's ass would be easy too. The subsequent occupation might be a challenge.

 

[dtugg]

delete

 

[Andy_Ross]

Compared to previous all out shooting wars between conventional forces it was a Cake Walk.

In your WW2 Germany comparison Germany is NK. Difference is NK but a tiny badly equippen and trained version.

Don't forget Iraq had a large Soviet equipped and trained military force with experience in the filed from the Iran Iraq War.

In the first Gulf War Iraqi Forces were rolled over by mainly US and British forces.

War against NK would be the same but NK is badly equipped and trained compared to even the Iraqi forces.

It's all very well them having huge numbers of guns pointing south but if they are in fixed positions they are dead as soon as they fire.
Why do you think that modern artillery is Self Propelling and highly mobile?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS-90

This is modern artillery. It stops, fires a salvo and is moving off within a minute to a new fire postion before the counter fire arrives.

 

[Skwinty]

My idea of a cake walk would be:

USAF sends 1 squadron of B52's on a pre-emptive strike.
Nuke the enemy before he suspects any thing.

US casualties and loss of equipment = 0
Enemy losses = Complete loss of everything.

War over in hours. Problem solved.

Now, that's a cake walk, albeit an immoral one.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Germany's blitzkreig was actually quite effective. It was Hitler's temper and inability to see the global picture that got the best of the Germans in WWII.


1) Hitler put off invading Russia for a critical 3-4 weeks to seek personal vengeance on Bulgaria. This 3-4 weeks would have been just enough time for the Germans to sack Moscow before the fall rains...

2) Hitler didn't recognize the significance of a number of opportunities until it was too late to capitalize: North Africa/Egypt (including Club Med) 1941, Moscow 1941, no plan/ability to invade GB in 1939, Battle of Britain 1939/40 (lost because, again, Hitler's temper caused redirect of Luftwaffe sorties from targeting military targets to targeting civilian targets in retribution for the RAF bombing Berlin), etc.


Methinks you need to brush up on your history a bit. Germany's downfall was not it's blitzkreig, it was the ineptitude/temper of it's Supreme Warlord - which, actually, is a more accurate comparison to NK than the one you were making.

 

[Skwinty]

Methinks you need to brush up on your history a bit. Germany's downfall was not it's blitzkreig, it was the ineptitude/temper of it's Supreme Warlord - which, actually, is a more accurate comparison to NK than the one you were making.

I never stated that the Blitzkrieg was the reason Germany lost the war.
Methinks you should read my posts again.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I never stated that the Blitzkrieg was the reason Germany lost the war.
Methinks you should read my posts again.

Hitler also thought that his blitzkrieg would be a cake walk.

This, sir/ma'am, implies that the blitzkrieg was not a cake walk. It was, in fact, quite a successful cake walk. It was only in Hitler's temper/command ineptitude that the Germans had any trouble.

 

[Skwinty]

It was a "cake walk" until he got to the english channel.
Goering said 1 month and he would destroy the RAF.

His blitzkrieg failed in Russia, and no matter how successful the blitzkrieg was, he lost the war.
That really is the crux of the matter. Sitting at home making grand predictions on the outcome of the war based on your superior technology and war machinery. Not too successful for Hitler in the long run.

The blitzkrieg was very successful in Poland, France, Holland and so one,
but there was no real opposition there. I mean, mechanised troops against men on horses.

Hence, my statement about counting your chickens before they hatched.

 

[WildCat]

Germany's blitzkreig was actually quite effective. It was Hitler's temper and inability to see the global picture that got the best of the Germans in WWII.


1) Hitler put off invading Russia for a critical 3-4 weeks to seek personal vengeance on Bulgaria. This 3-4 weeks would have been just enough time for the Germans to sack Moscow before the fall rains...

Possibly true, but there's no reason to think the Soviets wouldn't have fought on after the fall of Moscow. By that time, all Soviet arms production had been moved thousands of miles away to Siberia. And of course they were getting arms from the US shipped to Vladivostok.

2) Hitler didn't recognize the significance of a number of opportunities until it was too late to capitalize: North Africa/Egypt (including Club Med) 1941, Moscow 1941, no plan/ability to invade GB in 1939, Battle of Britain 1939/40 (lost because, again, Hitler's temper caused redirect of Luftwaffe sorties from targeting military targets to targeting civilian targets in retribution for the RAF bombing Berlin), etc.


Methinks you need to brush up on your history a bit. Germany's downfall was not it's blitzkreig, it was the ineptitude/temper of it's Supreme Warlord - which, actually, is a more accurate comparison to NK than the one you were making.

Hitler gambled that the UK would sue for peace after France fell. They didn't of course, feeling they were safe behind their moat from a German invasion. Then Hitler invaded the USSR anyway, and less than 6 months later the US was at war with Germany also and it was just a matter of time.

 

[Skwinty]

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/global-filipino/world/11/25/10/war-north-korea-poses-nightmare-scenarios

"Official Pentagon models assume it would take months to win the war at a cost approaching one million casualties or more, all told, including dead and wounded," Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told AFP

Under one war game played out in 2005 by The Atlantic magazine, former military officers and officials concluded that US fighter aircraft would have to carry out up to 4,000 sorties a day to prevent a WMD catastrophe for Seoul and the region.

South Korea has said it believes the North has about 100 nuclear facilities, but in the event of a war, Pyongyang would likely move weapons and atomic material to other locations, including a vast network of underground sites, Bennett said.

"We may not have surveillance that's adequate over all of North Korea in time to monitor where things get moved to," he said"


North Korea defeated in a week of "cake walking"

Not according to the experts.

ETA:http://www.rense.com/general37/nkorr.htm

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/05/27/what-would-a-korean-war-look-like-4-predictions/

 

[WildCat]

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/global-filipino/world/11/25/10/war-north-korea-poses-nightmare-scenarios

From there:

US and allied military planners have long believed that the North would be overwhelmed in a conventional war, but they worry how Seoul would use its arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, as well as its small cache of atomic bombs, said Bruce Bennett, a senior defense analyst at the Rand Corporation.

 

[MG1962]

My idea of a cake walk would be:

USAF sends 1 squadron of B52's on a pre-emptive strike.
Nuke the enemy before he suspects any thing.

US casualties and loss of equipment = 0
Enemy losses = Complete loss of everything.

War over in hours. Problem solved.

Now, that's a cake walk, albeit an immoral one.

Then China fires back when it realises how many of it people will die from fallout

Game over man...game over