NationStates Jolt Archive

This time its Iran versus North korea! We assume no WMD for this.

NK. I just think there overall more industrialized and more secular. Iran would have the fanaticism though.

As with before, if occupation is in mind then it'll be a sorry affair for the aggressor but this time however, I favor the North Koreans more than Iran. Both are nations who have experienced war though by comparison there would more so of that for Iran being in the volatile area of the Middle East. But North Korea is a rising power, whom I think have their military rise to a very respectabl level. Iran too have a good military, but being constantly in a hostile state of things they have in the region, that could have weaken their nation.

So for this one, I favor the North Koreans better.

North Korea would exhaust their resources, economy and troop SO fast, they would die by the millions.
In the meantime, Iran would play it defensive and build up. They have a large population, lots of industries (as they're almost self-sufficient), resources AND a strong will. They have also a lot more boats, planes and everything else than North Korea.

That said, if North Korea has *the bomb*, they'd still need a way of delivering it. And they wouldn't have more than 4-5 Hirochima-style nukes.

Iran. The people of Iran aren't starving to death in the streets the way they are in NK. How could NK possibly sustain a war longer than a week when thye can't feed their own people? Iran also has OIL in droves, while NK has....I dunno...rice?

North Korea will be treated exactly like the United States in a war with Iran.


Eventually, NK will be ground down in street-fighting and insurgent attacks.


If Kim-Jong does'nt remove his troops right-quick, he will eventually have a coup/revolution on his hands...He would never invade Iran in the first place, because he's not that stupid.

I'll have to agree and say Iran. NK might have some tech advantages, but it would probably wind up like us and Iraq.

Just more so because NK won't be able to sustain itself and then Iran will launch a counterstrike to take NK out.

EDIT: The Canada/Mexico one was better.

They'd both send massed waves of infantry against each other, victory hinging on who runs out of citizens or ammo first.

North Korea will be treated exactly like the United States in a war with Iran.


Eventually, NK will be ground down in street-fighting and insurgent attacks.


If Kim-Jong does'nt remove his troops right-quick, he will eventually have a coup/revolution on his hands...He would never invade Iran in the first place, because he's not that stupid.


Actually, unlike us, NK would probably just destroy Iran's cities and what not....that way, they'll be too dead to rebel :D

North Korea would win the war, and if Jong-Il is smart, he wouldn't even try to hold any territory. He'd make a deal with the leaders of Iran, and then remove his troops except for those that would remain for 'peacekeeping' duty for said leaders.

And maybe not even those, but certainly that NK wouldn't think of trying to hold any territory. The Middle East is just too far from Korea.

Instead, as I said above, NK would make a deal, and come out a bit more powerful. Probably for the handing of control over an oil field or something.

id say nk would win as iran would turn and run even though in the iran/iraq war the iranians would use there suicide waves to good effect to some extent.

If it was in korea id say korea to wn if in iran id say iran with open fronts there tanks are probably better if in europe id stick with nk because of the climate.

Neither. Their geographical location makes war between these nations infeasible in mass numbers. There could be no more than failed beach landings, terrorist strikes, and support for internal dissenters. I highly doubt either of these nations has the naval capabities to launch a decisive marine landing with enough forces to defeat the other nation. I also doubt that China, Russia, Pakistan, India, and the other nations between them would take kindly to military aircraft flying over these nations so Iran and North Korea could attack eachother.

But geographical limitations aside, I think it would just turn into a draw as both sides would do little more than send mass waves at eachother until finally the populace on both sides becamse weary of an unceasing war and overthrew these regimes, which already have dissent within their own ranks.

Whichever side Myrth picks will win. ;)

((North Korea, because it's more likely to use its nukes and it has a larger standing army, the largest in the world.))

Whichever side Myrth picks will win. ;)

((North Korea, because it's more likely to use its nukes and it has a larger standing army, the largest in the world.))

I thought China had the largest standing army...?

yup China's is the largest with 1.7 million troops

North Korea will blow Iran away. No question.

Militarly, yes. And possible ruin the country.

But if they don't destroy the country, NK would never be able to hold Iran. Logistics.

I dont think either one of them know how to wage a war. So I think regional powerhouses in both regions would see this and tell them the'yre stupid and to stop it before both countries are invaded or destroyed.

I dont think either one of them know how to wage a war. So I think regional powerhouses in both regions would see this and tell them the'yre stupid and to stop it before both countries are invaded or destroyed.

There's a regional powerhouse in the Middle East?

Besides, I think we're looking at this without regards to other nations.

There's a regional powerhouse in the Middle East?

Besides, I think we're looking at this without regards to other nations.

Um , I think Pakistan is nearby somewhere. Oh and not to mention the United States of Iraq.

Then this happens on some other planet?

Um , I think Pakistan is nearby somewhere. Oh and not to mention the United States of Iraq.

Then this happens on some other planet?

Well, Pakistan is concentrating on India. I think they could care less.

The USoI cannot afford to send a poodle out of its own borders for military interventionism, much less a single combat soldier.

And this is a hypothetical situation, so it might as well take place on another planet.

Well, Pakistan is concentrating on India. I think they could care less.

The USoI cannot afford to send a poodle out of its own borders for military interventionism, much less a single combat soldier.

And this is a hypothetical situation, so it might as well take place on another planet.

Oh, please. If the US had no political constraints, like the free pass they would get if,(restrained laughter), North Korean Marines landed on the coast of Iran, (LMAO), we would have no problem.

Oh, please. If the US had no political constraints, like the free pass they would get if,(restrained laughter), North Korean Marines landed on the coast of Iran, (LMAO), we would have no problem.

I've read this five times and it still makes no sense.

Assuming no WMDs, as per the OP, I'm going with Iran, assuming they somehow meet on neutral ground, and considering that the most likely scenario.

Iran has a better economy (GDP of more than 10x - $516 billion vs $30 bilion), is more industrialised (40% vs 33%), and has a larger population base (68 million ves 22 million). (All data from http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/) Because of these factors, it would better be able to prosocute a war and project it's power.

The DPRK still suffers sever shortages that would only be made worse in a war. I have serious doubts as to whether they can obtain enough fuel, eben for a defensive war.

In addition Iran has had experience in major more recently (1980s vs 1950s). There will be many more veteran troops available to Iran, and that makes a huge difference.

Assuming WMDs I'd say a tougher call, but still Iran. The same reasons hold. Plus Iran has the experience in this type of warfare.

I've read this five times and it still makes no sense.

Iraq does not exist.

Also I really dont think China would care for any non-chinese invading the penninsula.

Hell, I think that maybe even South Korea would get pissed

I don't know why they would have a war, but to look at the outcome of such a scenario, we could refer to the eight year long Iran-Iraq war.

Iraq's military tactics which were akin to Soviet ones could be compared to North Korea's. In the early stages of that war, Iraq were suceeding in their offensive. What ground them down was mass Iranian infantry attacks akin to the Soviets at Stalingrad.

Iran were on the verge of winning when Iraq gassed their troops, along with the Kurds.

The battle see-sawed one way and the other and eventually, it was stalemate, a WW1 trench warfare that killed 1 million people.

People wonder why Iraq, one of the biggest armies in the world in 1991, did not do well in the Gulf War.

Together with the US-led coalition's superior logistics and weaponry, Iraq had just come out of a eight year war that had sapped morale and strength.

Assuming they had the capability to invade one another:

In an Iran-N Korea, if North Korea invaded Iran, I suspect North Korea would make huge offensives at first, but will be bogged down by Iranian attacks, resulting in stalemate, maybe causing North Korea to withdraw after a time.

If Iran invaded North Korea, I think North Korea would defend valiantly, but the Iranians would slowly, but surely advance. The trouble could come from the North Koreans in the jungle.

Morale also has a high factor.

But in all honesty, who knows.