North Korea's Military Capabilities

[catsmate]

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

That's why I suspect the South Koreans would be doing it, not the US.

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.

Except there would be no guarantee that you'd eliminate all major weapons; even a few Scud derived rockets on SK cities carrying nerve agents or biologicals would cause significant casualties. A few volleys from MRLs could deliver tonnes of gas. And of course the possibility of retaliation against the USA with rockets fired from ships or nuclear weapons delivered by diesel electric subs against coastal cities........
How many US or SK casualties would you consider acceptable?

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

Game over man...game over

Why would they take the risk? Most of the PRK leadership are technocrats they know US retaliation would eliminate China as a country.

 

[MG1962]

Why would they take the risk? Most of the PRK leadership are technocrats they know US retaliation would eliminate China as a country.

The point I was responding to someone suggesting a senario in which the US launches a first strike.

A thought in general - How tough are the US missle defense systems going to have to work against erratic missles from the north. My understanding is the systems use predictive logic to nail their target, but if the target is not behaving logical, wonder how well they compensate

 

[catsmate]

You think North Korea is going to be able to get an aircraft over a South Korean population center?

Yeah, not gonna happen.

No air defense network is perfect there is always the possibility of an aircraft or missile getting through. Look how a handful of obsolete Scud clones caused panic in 1991.

Which is why you have to wonder how China thought allowing N. Korea to get nukes was in their best interest.

Most sources indicate that the building blocks for the DPRK nuclear programme were Soviet; the country has significant uranium deposits of its own.

It seems to me the only realistic way a war would start is initiated by North Korea. The US and/or South Korea aren't likely to start anything unless North Korea would take a specific action. What would that specific action be? Obviously not shelling a small island with a small military installation and some fishermen.

Are there any L. Ron Hubbard descendants in the US Navy?

 

[Foolmewunz]

This thread is horrifying. I really hope North Korea can get defused before we or others get into a friggin war with them.

Naah, this is the JREFF. We've single-handedly invaded, conquered and pacified Cuba, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, and now North Korea. There's not a country on earth that can withstand the might of the JREFF Couch Potato Army.

 

[John Jones]

[...]


You can't make synthetics out of grease, fat, or grains?




.

Where would they get the raw materials in sufficient quantity?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Polish cavalry consisted of eleven brigades, as emphasized by its military doctrine, equipped with anti tank rifles "UR" and light artillery such as the highly effective Bofors 37 mm antitank gun.

The myth = The Polish Army fought German tanks with horse-mounted cavalry wielding lances and swords

The myth originated from war correspondents reports of the Battle of Krojanty, where a Polish cavalry brigade was fired upon in ambush by hidden armored vehicles, after it had mounted a sabre-charge against German infantry.

The bolded part is the myth.

Read up on it.

http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/articles/polishcavalry.aspx

In your original post you mentioned France and Holland in there as well. YHOu left out the BEF.

France had more tanks than Germany at the start of the war, they mounted bigger guns and had more armour. They also had a lot more artillery, the ywere operating on 'inside lines' and had their mobilization centres at railheads. Most of the German Army was horsedrawn up until the end of the war.

 

[Nosi]

From there:

Not everyone has ethics WildCat, not even the dented USofA model.

 

[dtugg]

Not everyone has ethics WildCat, not even the dented USofA model.

SK doesn't have biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons.

 

[catsmate]

The point I was responding to someone suggesting a senario in which the US launches a first strike.

A thought in general - How tough are the US missle defense systems going to have to work against erratic missles from the north. My understanding is the systems use predictive logic to nail their target, but if the target is not behaving logical, wonder how well they compensate

Based on independent analysis of the Patriot interceptions in the Gulf war the interception rate was pretty terrible; about 10% of missiles were deflected and probably zero hits were scored. Israel in particular was not happy with their performance. The complete US analysis of its performance remain secret.
The newer models (F) are likely to be far better; they were designed as BMIs rather than anti-aircraft missiles and are hit-to-kill fused. I believe the SK acquired systems are the D model.
The US Navy's latest Standard missiles are probably at least as capable in this regard; the USN has more experience with SAM/ABM systems.
However a kill rate of 40-60% is considered highly optimistic and the DPRK is believed to have ~600-800 Scud derivatives stockpiled along with ~30 longer ranged No-dong/Shahab-3 missiles. While the Scuds are limited to SK (or China and parts of Russia) the No-dong can strike Japan; both can carry a warhead of about a tonne, sufficient for moderately crude nuclear weapon.

 

[ftl]

These posts certainly imply how easy it will be to defeat NK.

You're confusing two separate things that are being discussed - how likely a victory is versus the cost of that victory.

The majority opinion around here - including that of the above posts - is that if a major war broke out between NK and SK, then a South Korean victory would be essentially guaranteed.

This does NOT mean that the victory would be quick or bloodless. It's pretty obvious that NK would be able to inflict massive civilian casualties on SK - at the very least with their artillery, even if their putative chemical, biological, and nuclear weaponry ends up being unusable. (In fact, this was mentioned as a reason WHY SK would push towards a total victory, rather than settling for something less.)

This does NOT mean that the subsequent occupation and nation-building would be easy.

Only a fool ignores history.

Right. And recent history in fact supports the idea that a straightforward military conflict would be lost by NK.

The areas where we are much more likely to fail are in:
1) The massive casualties that could be inflicted by NK before the end. There aren't really any good options for avoiding this, as far as I can tell.
2) The process of rebuilding the nation - THAT'S the area where recent history says we'll do horribly.
3) The diplomacy of the situation - really, it's preferable to avoid the war in the first place due to (1). Finding an agreement between SK, the US, and China about what to do with NK.

 

[patchbunny]

This last part is all factually incorrect. He didn't get anything right. The T62 has a 115mm main gun, not 155mm. Some variants were later equipped with 125mm. The main gun on a T62 does not compare to that of an M1A1/M1A2. There is no known armor that the DU Sabot cannot penetrate. Also, the T62 can only travel 45km an hour. The M1A1 can travel 72km an hour (governed). The armor on a T62 is only about 500-600mm thick of hardened steel plated. The Abrams has 894mm thick depleted uranium/ceramic armor. A round shot from a T62 would not penetrate this armor.

I am not sure what kind of research the author did, but apparently he didn't do much. This kinda makes the rest of the article obsolete, given the authors lack of even the most basic knowledge of tanks. The T62 is a GARBAGE tank compared the the Abrams.

There's a lot of posturing on that page by someone with little knowledge of military systems. T62s lost out to Centurions in '73, and a Centurion is hardly in the league of an Abrams. An Abrams will chew up and spit out a T62 and won't even pause to pick the bits out of its teeth. Hell, any NK tank making an appearance will live a short, exciting life before being snuffed by one of a wide range of anti-tank systems on the peninsula.

I believe you're overstating the armor on a T62. Wikipedia (yeah, I know, but it's in-line from what I remember from years ago) shows 102mm @ 60 degrees on the glacis, and 242mm on the turret front.

Yeah, the rest of the article is just as much garbage as this.

 

[foxholeatheist]

<snip>

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6797598&postcount=4

These posts certainly imply how easy it will be to defeat NK.


<snip>

Bad copy. I was talking about a North Korean Total War assault on South Korea. In order to defeat well... That's a different matter altogether.

War between the North and the South will kill many civilians. I fear the North's promised and assured artillery barrage on the major cities the most. It's their most repeated and really only creatable threat. While I have no doubt the North will be stomped and roundly and utterly defeated, many many civilians will die in the process.

 

[dudalb]

Does anybody advocate a complete US withdrawal from Korea telling the South "Your're on your own"?
That would be a green flag for the North to attack.

 

[WildCat]

both can carry a warhead of about a tonne, sufficient for moderately crude nuclear weapon.

Actually crude nuclear weapons weigh more than state of the art nuclear weapons. The atomic bombs dropped on Japan during WWII weighed 5 tons or so, and this is likely the kind of nuke NK has.

 

[Skwinty]

You're confusing two separate things that are being discussed - how likely a victory is versus the cost of that victory.

My comments have been about the predictions of a quick and easy "cake walk".

Should war break out in Korea, I don't see it as a cake walk as many suggest it will be. War is not trivial.

There, IMO, be no real winners in the aftermath of this conflict.
Both sides will suffer for years afterwards.

 

[keale]

The J-20 prototype has flown. There was a demonstration/test flight on January 11 within view of Defense Secretary Gates and President Hu during Gates's visit to China. There was some political reaction to that placement & timing, suspecting it was to send the USA a message or that Hu's lack of knowledge that it was going to happen might be a sign of the President's lack of control over the military forces.

At least, an incomplete version flew, anyway, with older stock engines instead of the new ones that are being developed for it and promised in production models. It didn't have thrust vectoring as is planned for production models later, either, and I think it also didn't have the new radar ready yet either. That puts it close to the same stage of developmental as Sukhoi's T-50 about a year ago when it also flew with another plane's stock engines and no thrust vectoring, which is less than the point that the YF-22 was at in 1990, when two prototypes were built and flown (including the new engines, thrust vectoring, and new radars from the start) to speed up development & testing and compare two different brand-new engines. F-22 deployment was slowed down by factors that might not affect Russian or Chinese plane deployment, though.

From what can be told so far, it seems certain that the J-20's stealth, like the T-50's, will be less than that of an F-22, but whether or not it's also less than that of an F-35 is still up in the air. Its top speed might be like that of F-22 and T-50 or even faster but that's in doubt too. In speed, as in stealth, some different aspects of its design seem to contradict each other. It's bigger than any of the others, presumably to let it carry more fuel and maybe more missiles, but that will make it less maneuverable and harder to accelerate than an F-22 or T-50. There is no doubt that its radar, whenever it's ready, won't be as advanced as American or even Russian ones are.

"Cyberespionage" during F-35 development is suspected.

Not enough to run a war with, especially if you're already short on food anyway.

Your giving China alot of credit for what very well could be vapor ware. From what ive been told China has never solved the problems its had in its last generation of jet engines what would lead us to believe the new ones are any better.

China and Russia have a long history of overstating the real capabilities of their weapons systems where as the US will keep that information classified. Right now we know next to nothing about the actual capabilities of that plane and cant even speculate without even a clear picture to see how that plane is constructed. Its one thing to trot out a supposed "stealth" fighter its quite another to actually have one that actually works. As it stands right now we have 35+ years of stealth development and even now we are at least a decade ahead of anyone attempting to build one.

 

[catsmate]

Actually crude nuclear weapons weigh more than state of the art nuclear weapons. The atomic bombs dropped on Japan during WWII weighed 5 tons or so, and this is likely the kind of nuke NK has.

4.04 and 4.16 tonnes for the gun barrel and implosion models. However the US had weapons weighing under 1 tonne before 1950 and that was without any prior design work to copy and without computer modeling of the implosion.
For example with modern electronics the "X-unit" that handled the simultaneous detonation of the explosive lenses in the "Fat Man" bomb could be replaced with a unit weighing far less and the Composition B castings used in the lenses could be replaced with newer machinable explosives; together that would lose about 2.4 tonnes of weight. Removing the armoured shell and radiation shielding (except for the electronics) and replace the '40s era electronics and you'd have a weapon within the payload limits of a Scud.
Or a torpedo............

 

[Delvo]

My comments have been about the predictions of a quick and easy "cake walk".

Should war break out in Korea, I don't see it as a cake walk as many suggest it will be.

Why do so many anti-war people keep accusing others of saying that? It was a lie when Bush's opponents did it over Iraq, it's a lie here in this thread, it's a lie any time you say it about someone who didn't actually say what you say they said. But in this case, we're all right here, where everybody can easily see what was actually said, so your lie won't fool anybody, so why bother to tell it?

Your giving China alot of credit for what very well could be vapor ware... China and Russia have a long history of overstating the real capabilities of their weapons systems where as the US will keep that information classified. Right now we know next to nothing about the actual capabilities of that plane and cant even speculate without even a clear picture to see how that plane is constructed.

There are clear pictures and, at least in the Sukhoi plane's case, video. That doesn't give every last detail there is to know, but American engineers can tell what a plane was designed for and what functions are to be expected from particular visible features by looking at the shapes, with an understanding of physics (and the design goals they had in mind themselves when they built the originals that Russia & China are trying to copy). These estimates of what to expect from foreign planes are based on that, not on their governments' claims.

Funny how an atheistic communist country can wage holy war. More seriously, even though South Korea has taken a more aggressive stance recently, it seems they would not initiate war without some sort of provoking incident that involved an attack on the SK military or civilians.

They could consider the North's weapons pointed at them to be enough provocation to launch an attack on just those weapons, without invading the whole country. Of course, they'd have to hit as many of them as possible at once with as little warning time as possible for NK to see it coming... which is why the last time I speculated about this in this thread I said they might be waiting until they have F-35s or F-15SEs to launch the first salvos, especially against mobile launchers. After hitting the main thing NK has available to threaten SK's populace with at all, SK wouldn't need to press any further or send a single thing anywhere near any NK civilians. They could stop there and brace the border for a counter-invasion, which might not even come, since NK would know its losses in that strike hadn't been huge and a war would only increase its losses without bringing anything to gain because SK wasn't invading. It just depends on how much time SK thinks it would take to get all of the weapons and how many rounds NK could fire with the surviving ones in that time.

 

[Skwinty]

Why do so many anti-war people keep accusing others of saying that? It was a lie when Bush's opponents did it over Iraq, it's a lie here in this thread, it's a lie any time you say it about someone who didn't actually say what you say they said. But in this case, we're all right here, where everybody can easily see what was actually said, so your lie won't fool anybody, so why bother to tell it?

Firstly,
I am not anti war, but how would you feel if your father, mother, son or daughter were to be killed in action and then someone describes their death as a result of a cake walk.

Secondly,
The term cake walk has been used a fair amount in this thread.
This term has been used for describing how easy it will be to defeat NK conventional army and as such the war.

Thirdly,
Google the term "cake walk and war" and you will find tons of references.

Last but not least,
What lies have I been telling here?

It is easy to call some one a liar, but the least you can do is back it up.

 

[Ziggurat]

No air defense network is perfect there is always the possibility of an aircraft or missile getting through. Look how a handful of obsolete Scud clones caused panic in 1991.

I wasn't talking about missiles, I was talking only about aircraft. And you will note that Iraqi aircraft did not, in fact, get through anywhere we defended. Some of them got away by fleeing to Iran, but if North Korean jets flee to China, I doubt we'll care. So I don't have any reservations on claiming that North Korean aircraft won't make it over any large South Korean population centers.

Missiles might get through, though comparisons with GW1 aren't useful since the PAC-2 used in GW1 is now obsolete as well. And except for some of the very newest missiles (which North Korea doesn't have), the primary distinguishing features in ballistic missiles is speed, payload, and precision. Precision (and reliability, but that's a different matter) is where the SCUDs sucked, but it's irrelevant to the difficulty of hitting them with an ABM. In other words, out ability to defend against ballistic missiles is considerbly better today than it was in 1991.

That isn't a guarantee, of course. If North Korea has managed to develop nukes that they can launch with ballistic missiles, that's a very serious threat. In the absence of knowledge we should assume the worst case, but it's not a given that they have.