Threat from the DPRK (North Korea)

[Eric the Green]

(10-07-2017, 02:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-07-2017, 12:29 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-02-2017, 10:25 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-01-2017, 06:16 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-01-2017, 06:50 AM)Mikebert Wrote: They don't have a 10:1 edge in manpower, more like 2:1. They are numerically inferior in tank number.  All told, the South Korean military matches up pretty similarly to how NATO matched up against the Warsaw Pact.

That's true.  Of course, most experts believed that NATO would have had to resort to tactical nuclear weapons to prevent a Warsaw Pact victory had they chosen to invade.  We had tactical nukes in Europe; we don't in Korea.

Quote:Also the US would necessarily be involved since we have troops in theatre.  If NK started a war it would go ill for them.

If they get to the point they can destroy US cities, they can easily dictate that we remove the troops.  If we refuse, they start shelling Seoul.  If we invade, they nuke New York City.  That's why it's important we not get to that point.

I doubt they would actually hit a US city, knowing that if they did, that would be the end of them. Mutual Assured Destruction deterred the Russians for 40-odd years. Is Kim Jung Un more likely to attack if it means Unilaterally Assured Destruction for his regime?

Considering this further, I thought today that even if NK decides to dictate that we remove troops from Korea, and the USA refuses, and NK shells or invades the South, the USA would have to fight in Korea. South Korea is an ally who must be defended, especially from a ruthless, barbaric dictator. So then Un would have to choose whether to nuke a US city, knowing that if he did, the US would nuke him in response and wipe him out.

That's why he would wait until the US invaded, since in that case his regime would be destroyed if he didn't use the nuke.

I'm not so sure that the US would nuke him in response.  Yes, we could destroy his regime that way, but we also have more cities to lose than he does.

Quote:An interesting proposal being floated, which we may have discussed before, is whether the USA would agree to encourage China to take over North Korea, and change the regime and then leave, but presumably keep it as an ally and keep it from being a US ally, and keep it in the Communist orbit. But the regime instituted would be more like today's state capitalism in China, and more responsible in its policies.

What would Kim Jung Un try to do to China if this happened, would be my question. Would he nuke his former ally? Would he consider China is now his enemy and allied with the USA, and attack all his enemies? What would he be able to do before he is toppled?

I think he would nuke them, and Beijing is in easy reach of his missiles.  This is why China would prefer that we take care of him rather than their doing it.

China possibly step in to do this once North Korea had exhausted their nukes on us.

There's no question we would nuke him if he nuked us. That's how it works. This would destroy him before he could launch any more missiles at us. Our deterrent is still very strong in any case, against him nuking us. I don't know any evidence that suggests they could get off any more missiles at us, after they do it once.

It would take much longer to destroy him through ground invasion, since he has a big army.

That could well be true about him nuking China. But China stepping in once NK exhausts their nukes against us, would not happen, since NK would have been destroyed utterly if they launch even once against the USA. Especially with Trump as president.

I didn't favor the SDI missile defense during the Cold War, since this would only have encouraged the nuclear arms race with further developments to evade the defense. But against a small, weak, nuclear rogue nation like NK, missile defense seems a good option, if it works. We should probably develop the capability to test it by hitting and knocking down their test launches. That might be provocative, but would not cause any actual damage to NK or their program. Missile defenses would seem necessary to enforce a future treaty banning nuclear weapons, which the newly Nobel Prize winning organization ICAN is working for, and has gotten 126 nations to sign on to.