The next Korean War

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post07 Apr 2009, 09:47

ptplauthor wrote:When the North Korean people get their eyes wrenched open to see the real world, it is going to be a nasty surprise for them. When they see that North Korea's stuck in the 40s, and the rest of the world is in the 21st Century, I wouldn't want to be in the NoKo government.


Thing is most of the populace are said to be weak and malnourished from what i understand, I wouldn't hold to much hope in them having the strength to rise up and take over the government and its military enforcers.
Offline

muir

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 135
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 18:29

Unread post07 Apr 2009, 18:38

This seems to be going a bit off-topic but ok. I don´t think we have to worry about the North koreans trying hard to pick a fight. The people may be uneducated, poor and hungry but the leaders aren´t and they sure as hell wanna keep their lifestyle intact.

Thay may keep their tails in the air and rattle whatever sables they got but I for one think they know very well they can´t withstand a full on war with the US or, for that matter, China. On the other hand they also know that no US administration is likely to sacrifice US lifes unless they actually attack the US or a close ally. So what we end up with is what we´ve seen in the last couple of years. A bit of negotiating, then they do something slightly stupid, enough to stall and reset all negotiations but not stupid enough to start up the korean war ver. 2.0. If the negotiations actually went anywhere they would end up with reforms and sooner or later the now ruling class would lose their priviliges which they don´t want. Same equation pretty much applies to Burma or whatever they call themselves nowadays.
I don't have a problem with alcohol, I have a problem with reality.
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post07 Apr 2009, 20:28

It's not off topic the way I see it--didn't Sun Tzu say something about knowing the enemy being the best way to defeat him? (not saying that I know the North Koreans, but I'm learning as much as I can)

For decades, the North Korean citizens have been led to believe that the US is the big bad aggressor, when in reality, they're holding back the truth that America has done a lot to help their fraternal Socialist allies in the PRC. Instead of appealing to the North Korean leadership, maybe we need to look into countering the anti-American propaganda. The best way to do that is to heal the North Korean economy, but most of them involve Kim Jong-il giving up his nuclear dreams. That isn't going to happen unless foreign countires invest heavily in the DPRK. He must feel backed into a corner, and that's not a good thing for either side. We cannot count on Kim's successor being more willing to work with the outside world, chances are the next in line is going to be worse.

We need to put the war-club away and pull out the olive branch and carrots, but we still need to remain vigilant.

However:

If there's any time that he's going to take advantage of the war-weary American public, it's going to be soon. The military is fighting two wars, and he might consider taking his chances now, because it could seem like a very promising chance. He knows we've got a commitment to the ROK, but if the KPA can seize enough of the peninsula, he could think that the US won't attempt to take the country back because it would be too costly. That's where he's got the advantage--he doesn't give two Sierras about what the public opinion is.

If there's going to be belligerence, Kim's going to put his cards on the US not wanting to risk another war. And if it starts, all he has to do is threaten Japan, and they'll probably fold like, well Origami. We lose Japan as a place to base our troops, we also lose the most convenient place to use as a jumping-off point, since the USN doesn't have enough ships to launch another Incheon landing.

Kim Jong-il has got the mind of a five year old, problem is, he's got control of a country with chemical weapons, ballistic missiles, and a million-man Army.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline
User avatar

PhillyGuy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2006, 03:07

Unread post16 Apr 2009, 04:01

Due to this thread I've been looking at the DMZ on Google Earth and it's funny but the foremost outposts on the South Korean sides are all on miniature hills providing maximum field of view and fire. And the stacked defense lines look like 21st century versions of trench dig outs.
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post16 Apr 2009, 04:31

How much you wanna bet the KPA knows that and the Big Book o' Targets for their artillery puts those defense sites at the top?

Check out the Uiju Airfield--there's a Beagle bomber playing snowblower:
40°8'42"N 124°29'37"E

Guess with the lack of jet fuel, they can't fly, but don't want to let the planes go to waste.... :D

Looks like some dispersal--off away from the main field there's some Fishbeds and possibly an underground hangar--guess they got one message from ODS--HASs are overrated, but bunkerbusters can still probably bust those bunkers.

I use Wikimapia, it uses the same imagery from Google Maps but people have pointed out some points of interest--there's even a platoon of tanks somewheres in the US on a road march, and one guy looks like he took the turn a little tight (he's kinda far off the road, but meh, that's what tanks is for)
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

tank_top

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008, 22:59

Unread post28 May 2009, 14:46

I thought with current events this topic may warrant a revisit.

I just saw this quote and I personally think its crap, but others here may differ on their opinions.

[quote]
But short of having the ability to reach US territory, part of North Korea's strategy may be to become enough of a threat to its neighbors that the US is hesitant to commit to defending them, says Sheila Smith, senior fellow for Japan studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
"The North Koreans are willing, within limits, to use capabilities they do have to create instability within the region," says Ms. Smith. "There is a potential here of discriminating between the US and its allied partners in the region.... The main aim of the North Korean missile program is to delink the US from its willingness to defend Japan."
[quote]

Does anyone here think the US would ever NOT protect one of its closest allies like Japan?
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post28 May 2009, 15:54

Does anyone here think the US would ever NOT protect one of its closest allies like Japan?


Japan is certainly nervy with the possibility of a whackjob like Kim Jong-mentally-il possessing nuclear TBMs, IRBMs, or ICBMs. They're hoping the US will still cover them under our nuclear umbrella, but they have their doubts.

Japan has the technology to have a sound nuclear weapon inside ten years if they so choose. They already refine Uranium and Plutonium, it's just a matter of getting their hands on schematics--they can easily find the other components for a weapon, and can easily obtain machinery to manufacture such weapons. With their state of technology, they could go right into developing bombs able to be carried by fighters.

They have a breeder reactor--Monju--that I think was started when Mr. Peanut was POTUS, now with another genius in the White House, they're probably rethinking their situation vis-a-vis the US nuclear umbrella--I certainly would, if I was the Japanese PM.

Their citizens would certainly have a fit when they find out, but they're already holding on pretty tight to the ol' worry beads over North Korea.

I can't remember if I posted this before, but I think Japan is the only feasible target of North Korea.

You can eliminate the other countries in range like this:
Russia: not much population within range of their currently fielded missiles, and a definite Strategic Rocket Forces response.
China: Their economic buddy and their most relateable Commie ally....plus nukes
South Korea: Even with the saber-rattling across the 38th Parallel, both countries are still Korea, and Kim isn't gonna lob a nuke at Seoul. It would go better for them if they use conventional forces--they're pobably not good at operating in a CBRN environment.
US: North Korea's missiles fall short of major population centers, though they can probably hit Guam or Hawaii, they'd end up not having much to show in exchange for total national death by lobbing one at American rocks in the Pacific. They're 0-for-2 when it comes to long-range ICBM launches.

Japan, on the other hand, is a historical enemy going all the way back to the Imjin War, if not farther back. They're also a capitalist society on top of the 3+ invasions over their history.

Feel free to pick this apart--it was for my term paper in East Asian history, I already passed, so it's no problem. It's a big part of the reason I wasn't on much since January.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

muir

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 135
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2008, 18:29

Unread post28 May 2009, 22:45

ptplauthor

I pretty much concur with most of your analysis but ten years? I remember reading somewhere that (no, don´t remember where) the japanese could build nukes in less than a year if really pressed to. Sure, it would probably be something like the ones NK has tested but still nukes. You may very well be right and I´m dead wrong, just curious about your reasoning here. i mean, even NK and Pakistan have built some, surely it´d be easy for Japan to follow line ÍF they really wanted to?
I don't have a problem with alcohol, I have a problem with reality.
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post29 May 2009, 00:16

The capability is there for a one-year nuke, but it'd be as covert as the sunrise, they'd certainly want to keep their own people in the dark for a while--public unrest isn't good going off of Japanese history. Also, any bomb completely designed and fielded inside a year may have flaws (think of the terrorists in Sum of All Fears: He-3 contamination fizzled the bomb).

I factored in a slow, deliberative, and thus likely covert process. Rapid acquisition of so much dual-use technology--even if it is already in-country would be noticed and commented on. Someone could stumble to what they're up to and blow their cover.

Any Japanese bomb is going to yield more than North Korea's May 2009 test. The Japanese have much better scientists that have broader access to pertinent data. They would likely come up with a variable-yield weapon similar (if not a direct copy of) the B61.

The delivery system is predictable--due to Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, the JSDF cannot possess cruise or ballistic missiles, leaving fighters as the only option. The B61 can (according to Wikipedia) be used by the F-15 and F-16. The J-model Eagles or the F-2s (as a derivative of the Viper) can be fitted with domestically-produced upgrades to make them capable of nuclear delivery.

One other thing I pointed to in my term paper is the possibility of setting off an Asian nuclear arms race.

South Korea may see Japanese nuclear weapons as a threat in itself, and begin its own nuclear program using highly-enriched Uranium in lieu of Plutonium.

The People's Republic of China may look at the three new nuclear states as a threat as well, and up the ante by increasing its own stockpile.

The Republic of China may begin its own nuclear program (if they don't already have a secret one) and if that is discovered by the mainland, the PLA may move more weapons into the southern part of their territory.

China's response as outlined above may cause Southeast Asian countries to think about adopting nuclear weapons of their own. As the race spreads westward into Central and South Asia things would get very tense, especially India and Pakistan who may already be in a race of their own thanks to China increasing its stockpile to better counter the Koreas and Japan. Should it spread as far as the Middle East, the chances of these weapons being used again goes up into a near eventual certainty.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

Gamera

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 887
  • Joined: 23 May 2005, 07:54

Unread post20 Feb 2011, 14:46

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/na ... 81742.html

Korea had 950 nuclear warheads till 1991

02-20-2011 17:53

Nuclear weapons had been deployed on the Korean Peninsula for 33 years from 1958 until 1991 when the United States withheld the last 100 heads of tactical nuclear weapons, a local daily has reproted.

According to declassified document of the United States, there was training by the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing which possessed 48 F-16C/Ds at the U.S. Air Base in Gunsan during the first half of the year.

The fighter wing held a special training of loading and manipulating nuclear warheads.
The special training consisted of nuclear attack session and single-ship strike session.
This means that in case of emergency, the fighter jets which carried or were able to carry B-61 warheads were ready for war, while completing a variety of training.
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post21 Feb 2011, 05:36

Wow, didn't know those details of history. Thanks for the info, G. God speed and respects to all korean people and for a good, peaceful future. I think the time is now.
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

Gamera

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 887
  • Joined: 23 May 2005, 07:54

Unread post21 Feb 2011, 08:11

FYI, tac nukes and a TDY of US F-4s to carry them were in Taiwan until the 1970s, if you didn't know.
Offline

irishlad

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011, 22:29

Unread post06 May 2011, 18:25

One thing worth putting thought to;
(bare with me)Iran wants to buy the S-300/HQ-9 missile systems (most likely HQ-9)
North Korea supplies most of the Iranian Navy ships
so China sells them the HQ-9 Russia probably wouldn't
North Korea ends up with HQ-9
Poses serious threat to South Korean air force
not so much of a paper force now.
:pint:
Offline

irishlad

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011, 22:29

Unread post26 May 2011, 21:55

nuclear weapons aren't the main source of worry,(but they are still a threat), its the chemical weapons he has amassed in the shadow of the nuclear program.
:pint:
Offline

OleRusty

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2008, 06:32

Unread post09 Apr 2012, 21:35

Anybody who may still be interested in this topic should try a copy of my book. It's based on the current events following KJIs death and encompasses a lot of the topics we covered on this thread. If you're interested, give me a shout and check out Penalty of Pride on Amazon. I guarantee you'll enjoy the book.
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests