Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Pnx]

Something I'd like to point out about a war with north korea, is that they have a little under 10 million soldiers in their forces... And north korea would probably start conscripting more of them if a war starts. South korea has about 3.5 million soldiers... Now it's true they'd get NATO support, and they have better technology, so chances are the south would win in an armed conflict... but it would still be very ugly, In fact the numbers actually put it pretty close to the kinds of numbers fielded in WW2. It would be one very ugly war. Unlike Iraq in which America steamrolled the Iraqi forces.

[Dakk]

Which only enforces the fact that marching into a foreign dictatorship pretending everything will be ok once enough people are killed is a rather bad idea.

[DJ]

Yeah, but their tech is closer to WW1, so NK's losses would dwarf Somme.

[ChairmanPoo]

NK tech is whatever they can get their hands on. They are apparently a world-class rocket weaponry exporters, for starters.

[DJ]

Meh, I doubt they have much in the way of electronics, so their rockets must be dumb missiles. Might as well use artillery instead.

But really, I think the whole thing would quickly turn into trench warfare, and then the Americans would roll in with their air superiority and napalm the trenches and a couple of years down the line use "if it wasn't for us, you'd all be speaking North Korean" as if it was some kind of a trump card.

[Dakk]

There's also the vague threat of NK still having nukes, which I'm pretty sure someone able to suddenly shoot 200 artillery charges at the hated neighbor would be willing to use to go out with a bang.

NK did claim to have nukes not too long ago, and claimed to have performed a test back in 2006, which was confirmed by nearby countries when they detected traces of the immense shockwave.

Even if said warheads are WWII black mark'd soviet ones, they still probably have enough range and destruction capacity to take out a fairly sized city.

[DJ]

America has SDI

[Leafsnail]

Technically, they are provided by China.

Their relations aren't that great.

Yeah, but their tech is closer to WW1, so NK's losses would dwarf Somme.

Wouldn't've thought so.  Most of their investment goes into the military, so they'd probably have some more advanced weapons.

[Eugenitor]

dwarf Somme.

Only with more Fun. And more Chernobyl once we start hitting their nuclear facilities.

Whatever NK has for fighters would just get pwned, and whatever they have for anti-air wouldn't even be able to realistically target our stealth bombers. It'll just be explosives, gibs, and carnage. Best thing would be to waste their artillery first- all of it at once with a mass surprise strike (and if you don't think the US doesn't have it targeted already...)- then their mid-level leadership. The US wouldn't even need to commit ground troops; USN and USAF would be more than enough to rip the balls off NK's military. The locals wouldn't see a single round-eye.

Besides, South Koreans have lots of experience with killing massed, cheaply-produced infantry and artillery...

The problem isn't and never was winning the war. It's what comes after. And the civilian death toll. And nuclear retaliation. And what the Chinese and/or Russians might do.

[Dakk]

America has SDI

But does SK?

[Leafsnail]

And what the Chinese and/or Russians might do.

And the rest of the world.

[RedWarrior0]

dwarf Somme.

Only with more Fun. And more Chernobyl once we start hitting their nuclear facilities.

Whatever NK has for fighters would just get pwned, and whatever they have for anti-air wouldn't even be able to realistically target our stealth bombers. It'll just be explosives, gibs, and carnage. Best thing would be to waste their artillery first- all of it at once with a mass surprise strike (and if you don't think the US doesn't have it targeted already...)- then their mid-level leadership. The US wouldn't even need to commit ground troops; USN and USAF would be more than enough to rip the balls off NK's military. The locals wouldn't see a single round-eye.

Besides, South Koreans have lots of experience with killing massed, cheaply-produced infantry and artillery...

The problem isn't and never was winning the war. It's what comes after. And the civilian death toll. And nuclear retaliation. And what the Chinese and/or Russians might do.

I was saying this a few pages ago.

[Dakk]

Giving a good excuse to call America evil to some large, ambitious eastern nations sounds like the real fuel for WWIII, not stomping some small schizophrenic nation.

[DJ]

The only way to predict the outcome is a game of WH40K. IG can represent NK very well (Chenkov is a must), and I guess America must be Eldars with all their fancy tech. Who's SK, though? Mahrines?

[alway]

NK is indeed suspected of having a nuke or two, but not enough to destroy much more than the SK capital and maybe a couple other cities. They have lots of artillery, much of which is also within range of the SK capital, which is itself located relatively close to the border. The tunnels and such would likely mean many of the higher-ups of NK would survive.

The war would likely escalate to a small nuclear war due simply to the size of the NK army, with it being unlikely of any country coming to the aid of NK so long as NK fired the first shots. NK's surface would be terraformed into a crater in a few hours, with whatever NK citizens left living in underground bunkers and whatever sort of tunnel system they have. The threat of NK would be neutralized for a good long while, but the debris in the atmosphere could cause a small (or perhaps not so small) nuclear winter, possibly decreasing crop yields worldwide.

If, of course, NK does not strike first, yeah, it may well escalate to WW3.