NationStates Jolt Archive

In the unlikely event of a second Korean war, it is impossible to foresee a situation where North Korea could be victorious or even threaten South Korea. South Korea's security simply is ensured. There is no power both capable and willing of launching a successful invasion of South Korea in East Asia. Communist domination of Korea is simply an impossible scenario.

1. South Korea has a military budget over four times that of North Korea.

2. South Korea's army has numerical parity with North Korea, as well as a far larger manpower pool.

3. South Korea is literally forty years ahead of North Korea in terms of technology. The difference between the USA and Iraq was NOTHING compared to the difference between South and North Korea. The technological gap is almost unbearably high. The USA army smashed Hussein's army in a highly one-sided military conflict; there's no reason South Korea can't do the same to North Korea.

4. The morale in the North Korean army can't be high. When your entire country is starving, your army won't have much morale. The morale in the South Korean army would probably be sky-high in almost all instances of a war.

Simply put, there's no way in hell North Korea could ever defeat South Korea. Chances a war, a war would result in the end of the Communist regime in North Korea seeing as the war would probably have the opposite effect. The myth of a future where North Korean tanks are driving toward Seoul is simply as said earlier, a myth. A more likely scenario is the image of South Korean soldiers patrolling Pyongyang.

North Korea has China's backing.

When you have nothing, there's nothing to lose. That's a very powerful impetus when it comes to being willing to sacrifice yourself. I doubt that many in the SK army have that necessary sense of futility.

Yeah, bleak, but probably true.

Because they have this huge mirror in space that can collect sunlight and focus it and swat nukes out of the sky like they was nothing!

North Korea has LOTS OF ARTILLERY and its soldiers get more food than the average factory worker, which is actually quite important to keeping morale up.

That plus loot-pertunities makes it worth fighting in South Korea for the North Korean military.

This is why they stand something of a chance. But not much of one.

When you have nothing, there's nothing to lose. That's a very powerful impetus when it comes to being willing to sacrifice yourself. I doubt that many in the SK army have that necessary sense of futility.

Yeah, bleak, but probably true.
How the Viet Cong were recruited, tbh, and look what happened there :p

When you have nothing, there's nothing to lose. That's a very powerful impetus when it comes to being willing to sacrifice yourself. I doubt that many in the SK army have that necessary sense of futility.

True, but a lot of people in the SK army, and most people in SK know life as they know it is over if the Communists win. Not to mention the amount of North Koreans defecting, switching sides, or surrendering should logically be extremely high.

SK has Black Eagle fighter jets.

North Korea has China's backing.

China would not be willing to mobilize its entire army to support North Korea. Even if China sent a million (half of its standing army) into Korea, they would hideously outnumbered and outgunned by the South Koreans. It would not be even nearly enough to change the outcome of the war. Unless China commits itself to total war, something that will never happen, on the side of of North Korea, something also very unlikely, North Korea doesn't have a chance in hell.

And China doesn't really have a reason to protect North Korea. It's more in Chinese interests to see South Korea win.

They don't have a chance...but that's not what people are really worried about. The North Korean military is badly underequipped, outdated, and poorly nourished by world standards, and their economy is nowhere near capable of supporting any kind of prolonged military conflict...they'll lose for certain. However, the concern is that they'll be able to launch a surprise attack and kill hundreds of thousands or even millions of civilians in Seoul and other places near the border before the South Korean and US forces can defeat them. A lot of people don't necessarily realize how close the capitol is to the border; even if the North Koreans don't win the war, they'll be able to pillage and ruin the border regions before they're stopped.

China's not going to support them in a war, that's for sure; they've got a lot more to lose than to gain by supporting a backward hellhole like North Korea against the wealthy South. I'm sure they'd more or less remain neutral or even move in to the North to reconstruct it in a more favorable vein; the prospect of a China-Korea transportation and trade corridor is highly intriguing as is the sheer potential of the underdeveloped North Korean market.

Here's a simple fact: China generates $132 billion in bilateral trade with SK. The amount with NK is so small it's not even listed.

True, but a lot of people in the SK army, and most people in SK know life as they know it is over if the Communists win. Not to mention the amount of North Koreans defecting, switching sides, or surrendering should logically be extremely high.

The North Korean army will probably disintegrate like Saddam's forces did in the Gulf War once the US and its allies began pounding them.

And I can only wonder what would happen back in the North once the military has been depleted and the remaining population of impoverished, hungry people are no longer held under a firm military boot...chances are, there will be domestic insurrections as soon as the North Korean army moves out.

bCause NorTh KoreA has teh EbIlll Nooks n will pwn D.C.

Simple. They (NK) will paste a large part of South Korea. They might not win militarily, but SK will lose at home. Seoul will basically be a pile of rubble, for starters.

I'll go dig up the National Geographic article on this sometime.

How the Viet Cong were recruited, tbh, and look what happened there :p

Viet Minh. Viet Cong was a derogatory name put about by the American intelligence community as part of a propaganda campaign.

In the unlikely event of a second Korean war, it is impossible to foresee a situation where North Korea could be victorious or even threaten South Korea. South Korea's security simply is ensured. There is no power both capable and willing of launching a successful invasion of South Korea in East Asia. Communist domination of Korea is simply an impossible scenario.

1. South Korea has a military budget over four times that of North Korea.

2. South Korea's army has numerical parity with North Korea, as well as a far larger manpower pool.

3. South Korea is literally forty years ahead of North Korea in terms of technology. The difference between the USA and Iraq was NOTHING compared to the difference between South and North Korea. The technological gap is almost unbearably high. The USA army smashed Hussein's army in a highly one-sided military conflict; there's no reason South Korea can't do the same to North Korea.

4. The morale in the North Korean army can't be high. When your entire country is starving, your army won't have much morale. The morale in the South Korean army would probably be sky-high in almost all instances of a war.

Simply put, there's no way in hell North Korea could ever defeat South Korea. Chances a war, a war would result in the end of the Communist regime in North Korea seeing as the war would probably have the opposite effect. The myth of a future where North Korean tanks are driving toward Seoul is simply as said earlier, a myth. A more likely scenario is the image of South Korean soldiers patrolling Pyongyang.

Contingency. We don't expect North Korea to win; but we assume they will, and rpepare accordingly. It helps reduce the luck factor astronomically.

North Korea might not be able to win a war against South Korea, but they could well drag South Korea down with them, considering all the artillery they have pointing towards Seoul, which lies rather close to the border, although SK government attempts to move it have failed miserably.

Of course, the chances of a war actually happening are next to nothing. SK doesn't want to be babysitting the North for years draining their economy: they'd much rather NK reform before they unify peaceably. NK isn't stupid enough to start anything nasty, and clever enough to blackmail the world into supplying oil/funds every time their economy tanks.

Also, the DPRK is currently in position to eradicate, obliterate, destroy, eliminate Seoul. Massive amounts of artillery, combined air strikes and forward armor thrust across DMZ. All before allies could muster significant response.

It's not the outcome of the war we're worried about, but the course.

Viet Minh. Viet Cong was a derogatory name put about by the American intelligence community as part of a propaganda campaign.You'll have to excuse me, I'm going off the information provided by the Vietnamese guide to the Chu Chi tunnels and the following Vietnamese propaganda video, both of which described the Democratic Republic of Vietnam's fighters as Viet Minh and the red zone-recruited fighters as Viet Cong. I believe they wore the name as a sort of badge of honour. Then again, the guide may just have been bitter - he was threatened with imprisonment and brutal punishment - by the Republic of Vietnam's government - if he didn't join the South's army, then imprisoned from 1975-1979 in a 're-education' camp for being forced to fight for a cause he didn't voluntarily join.

Lovely country though.

Also, the DPRK is currently in position to eradicate, obliterate, destroy, eliminate Seoul. Massive amounts of artillery, combined air strikes and forward armor thrust across DMZ. All before allies could muster significant response.

I doubt they'd be able to use aircraft or armor, considering they're pretty much out of oil and don't have the technology or economic base for Fischer-Tropsch conversion of coal to oil.

However, the artillery are still a deadly threat.

However, the artillery are still a deadly threat.


The artillery is only a threat for a maximum of 8-10 hours before they would get annihilated from air-power from US planes alone not to mention SK. The North Koreans couldn't get their artillery dismantled and moved to safety fast enough.

North Korea has China's backing.

And South Korea would probably have ours (U.S.).

The artillery is only a threat for a maximum of 8-10 hours before they would get annihilated from air-power from US planes alone not to mention SK. The North Koreans couldn't get their artillery dismantled and moved to safety fast enough.

Why bother moving it? One or two salvos, and Seoul is gone. Not likely to have someone start a war against you when they know they'll pay that price.

Why bother moving it? One or two salvos, and Seoul is gone. Not likely to have someone start a war against you when they know they'll pay that price.

Seoul can easily be rebuilt. You are right about one thing 'one or two salvo's' and North Korea is gone.

Don't you just love MAD.

Don't you just love MAD.

Do unto others as you would want done to you.

Don't you just love MAD.

It would be more like slightly assured destruction for one of you and total annihilation for the other. Doesn't feel mutual at all.

Seoul can easily be rebuilt.
The inhabitants can not. And quite frankly, they're rather more important.

The inhabitants can not. And quite frankly, they're rather more important.

Seoul has a nice bunker system. A surprise attack is unlikely and they are trained well on getting to their bunkers.

Seoul can easily be rebuilt. You are right about one thing 'one or two salvo's' and North Korea is gone.

Seoul has over 10 million people. North Korea has Chemical and Biological weapons, missiles, and masses of artillery pointed at it.

If things touch off, I wouldn't want to be anywhere on that peninsula. NK would go down, but would the price be worth it for SK?

Seoul is in range of NK's artillery and without Seoul, SK is gonna have a hard, hard time.

Besides, if NK went for an all-out offensive into the South - who's gonna stop'em, eh?

If you have nothing to lose, you have all to gain.

Seoul has over 10 million people. North Korea has Chemical and Biological weapons, missiles, and masses of artillery pointed at it.

If things touch off, I wouldn't want to be anywhere on that peninsula. NK would go down, but would the price be worth it for SK?

That's why they should just launch a pre-emptive attack after evacuating Seoul. With surgical strikes they could keep civ. casualties to a minimum.

Seoul has over 10 million people. North Korea has Chemical and Biological weapons, missiles, and masses of artillery pointed at it.

If things touch off, I wouldn't want to be anywhere on that peninsula. NK would go down, but would the price be worth it for SK?

Does SK have any say in a NK surprise attack? I would say sats would pick up the troop movements and supply trucks. The US would call Kim Jong Ill and say wtf? He would then say nufin. Then the US say's better stay that way bitch if you know what's good for you.

Does SK have any say in a NK surprise attack? I would say sats would pick up the troop movements and supply trucks. The US would call Kim Jong Ill and say wtf? He would then say nufin. Then the US say's better stay that way bitch if you know what's good for you.

See below. The forces that North Korea has within easy reach of the border will royally screw over a lot of South Korea. Surprise attack won't require moving troops closer in, just ringing them up and saying 'Go'.

Click Stand;12987120']That's why they should just launch a pre-emptive attack after evacuating Seoul. With surgical strikes they could keep civ. casualties to a minimum.

Sure. Launch surgical strikes on three quarters of a million troops, close on a thousand missiles, and over ten thousand artillery pieces. And stop any of them from fighting back. Oh yeah, and this is just what they have within 60 miles of the border.

Before doing that, work out how to evacuate ten million people without word getting to your enemy.

I contend that it is impractical for the US and South Korea to attempt to defeat North Korea militarily, and suicidal for either Korea to attack the other. Mutually Assured Destruction wins again.

The artillery is only a threat for a maximum of 8-10 hours before they would get annihilated from air-power from US planes alone not to mention SK. The North Koreans couldn't get their artillery dismantled and moved to safety fast enough.

8-10 hours is sufficient to do the trick. And that's being awfully conservative with an estimate.

8-10 hours is sufficient to do the trick. And that's being awfully conservative with an estimate.

Would be much quicker then that. In fact US forces would engage before the president knew exactly what was going.

Would be much quicker then that. In fact US forces would engage before the president knew exactly what was going.

Sure. If North Korea has had a chance to fire one solid volley, a rather large number of people in Seoul are going to die.

How's that for odds?

Sure, South Korea and allies would win the war, but then what? German reunification was disastrous for East Germany -- close to seventeen years later, East Germany STILL feels the effects of being behind technologically and financially. Among other things, the government is investing 10 BILLION Euros a year developing it. If Germany still has problems like this, what do you think life will be like when the gap between north and south korea is ten times as big?

Less we all forget, SK has the US for support. In fact, the SK army (like the Japanese "Self-Defense Forces") barely exists. And NK has nukes, not the best but that doesn't matter much since if they start losing too badly they might just use them. That is most of the concern.

Seoul has a nice bunker system. A surprise attack is unlikely and they are trained well on getting to their bunkers.

Does SK have any say in a NK surprise attack? I would say sats would pick up the troop movements and supply trucks. The US would call Kim Jong Ill and say wtf? He would then say nufin. Then the US say's better stay that way bitch if you know what's good for you.


Are you 11 years old or something? Because you sure as hell argue like one.

What nice bunker system? Link? What special training prepares them for such a barrage? Link?
Sats picking up troop movements? What the fuck are satellites going to do against incoming artillery rounds?

"Hey Bill.... what's that flashy thing just north of the DMZ?
"I dunno Steve.... hey look. More and bigger flashy things further south."
"Huh..... Think Seoul is still there?"
"I.....doubt it."

And Seoul can be rebuilt? Sure it can. Now how do you propose to replace 10 million people, the government, military heads and any centralised authority following that initial artillery barrage?

Magic?

Okay, for better actual figures:

In absolute terms, South Korea's economy is not as strong as West Germany's was. In relative terms, North Korea's economy is far worse than that of East Germany's. The income per capita ratio (PPP) was about 3:1 in Germany (about US$25,000 for West, about US$8,500 for East) [2]. The ratio is about 13:1 in Korea (over US$24,200 for South, US$1,800 for North, CIA Factbook 2006), although GDP estimates vary widely (see List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita). This income gap is rapidly increasing as the North Korean economy stagnates and the South Korean economy is characterized by moderate to high economic growth.

North Korea has China's backing.

South Korea has the backing of most importantly the United States, and the rest of the UN.

See below. The forces that North Korea has within easy reach of the border will royally screw over a lot of South Korea. Surprise attack won't require moving troops closer in, just ringing them up and saying 'Go'.



Sure. Launch surgical strikes on three quarters of a million troops, close on a thousand missiles, and over ten thousand artillery pieces. And stop any of them from fighting back. Oh yeah, and this is just what they have within 60 miles of the border.

Before doing that, work out how to evacuate ten million people without word getting to your enemy.

I contend that it is impractical for the US and South Korea to attempt to defeat North Korea militarily, and suicidal for either Korea to attack the other. Mutually Assured Destruction wins again.

Your points are well taken, but you fail to grasp just how behind the NK army is technologically. We'd win, so long as we don't force their hand and they touch off a few nukes in a last-ditch counter-offensive. So long as we mine the crap out of all major open-country along the border and force them to travel through choak-points, we'll slaughter them. Don't fight harder, fight smarter. Also helps when we take out any bridges they could use and put JDAMS and Tomahawks on their logistics bases and centers of C3I (command, control, communication, intelligence).

South Korea has the backing of most importantly the United States, and the rest of the UN.

Just like 1953, eh?

(okay, it's not identical, but it's close enough that US and China on opposite sides could elad to nukes.)

In absolute terms, South Korea's economy is not as strong as West Germany's was. In relative terms, North Korea's economy is far worse than that of East Germany's. The income per capita ratio (PPP) was about 3:1 in Germany (about US$25,000 for West, about US$8,500 for East) [2]. The ratio is about 13:1 in Korea (over US$24,200 for South, US$1,800 for North, CIA Factbook 2006), although GDP estimates vary widely (see List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita). This income gap is rapidly increasing as the North Korean economy stagnates and the South Korean economy is characterized by moderate to high economic growth.

It's also important to note that the East German economy also had a pretty advanced industrial base, an educated population, abundant raw materials and significant contacts with the East and West that kept it up to date militarily and in many economic sectors. The NVA was one of the best armies in the Eastern Bloc and they didn't even have to spend crippling amounts of money maintaining it, unlike North Korea.

North Korea has none of those. East Germany looks like the US compared to North Korea...

South Korea has the backing of most importantly the United States, and the rest of the UN.

Just as it did over forty years ago. And look how long that war lasted, even after peace-talks began.

Just like 1953, eh?

(okay, it's not identical, but it's close enough that US and China on opposite sides could elad to nukes.)

Yes, but in 1953 the US Military was not in great shape after WW2, and was much closer technologically to the North Koreans than it is now. Today we are lightyears ahead of the Koreans.

Par example:

The biggest military concern in striking North Korean nuclear facilities is the threat of North Korean counter-attacks. Seoul, the South Korean capitol, lies within range of North Korean long-range artillery. Five hundred 170mm Koksan guns and 200 multiple-launch rocket systems could hit Seoul with artillery shells and chemical weapons, causing panic and massive civilian casualties. North Korea has between 500 and 600 Scud missiles that could strike targets throughout South Korea with conventional warheads or chemical weapons. North Korea could hit Japan with its 100 No-dong missiles. Seventy percent of North Korean army ground units are located within 100 miles of the demilitarized zone separating North and South Korea, positioned to undertake offensive ground operations. These units could fire up to 500,000 artillery rounds per hour against South Korean defenses for several hours. Finally, if North Korea does have one or two deliverable nuclear weapons, nuclear retaliation (or nuclear threats) would also be available to North Korea leaders.

Even if U.S. strikes on North Korea nuclear facilities are successful, North Korea would still have the capability to inflict massive damage against South Korea and the 37,000 U.S. troops based there. Retaliation might be gradual, or North Korea might resort to large-scale strikes quickly. Efforts to invade the South are less likely, but cannot be ruled out entirely (especially if U.S. military forces are preoccupied in the Persian Gulf). The decision about how to respond would be up to North Korean leaders, who would have a range of military options and the ability to escalate the conflict over time. Although the United States would likely win an all-out war, the damage to South Korea would be tremendous and U.S. forces would sustain large casualties. One U.S. military estimate suggested that U.S. and South Korean military forces might suffer 300,000-500,000 casualties within the first 90 days of fighting, in addition to hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties.

Military Options for Dealing with North Korea's Nulear Program (http://cns.miis.edu/research/korea/dprkmil.htm)

Isn't anyone concerned of the casualties North Korea would suffer? They're, y'know, as much people like you and me as the South Koreans?


On topic, sure, US, Japan & SK could trample all over NK any given day of the week and NK could annihilate large portions of Seoul at a moments notice but this won't happen because of the high number of casualties on both sides in any plausible scenario: MAD = peace.

btw. NK needs more nukes and launchers for more guaranteed peace.

Yes, but in 1953 the US Military was not in great shape after WW2, and was much closer technologically to the North Koreans than it is now. Today we are lightyears ahead of the Koreans.

China's gotten more advanced technology too. Such as the aforementioned nukes.

Are you 11 years old or something? Because you sure as hell argue like one. This coming from the poster that wants to know if you are down with OPP. LOL, relax psycho was saying that tongue in cheek.


What nice bunker system? Link? What special training prepares them for such a barrage? Link?
Sats picking up troop movements? What the fuck are satellites going to do against incoming artillery rounds?


Seoul system of air raid shelters for a portion of Seoul's citizens. Also there are regular drills for air raids in Seoul. The sat's would detect movements by the North and give a little warning. Either they can start on evacuation Seoul and or use a first strike option in the face of a imminent attack. Not saying many would die and Seoul would be reduced to rubble. That will happen however there are countermeasures in dealing with a surprise attack.

The North Korean army will probably disintegrate...I m loving it. :cool:

1. South Korea has a military budget over four times that of North Korea.

2. South Korea's army has numerical parity with North Korea, as well as a far larger manpower pool.

3. South Korea is literally forty years ahead of North Korea in terms of technology. The difference between the USA and Iraq was NOTHING compared to the difference between South and North Korea. The technological gap is almost unbearably high. The USA army smashed Hussein's army in a highly one-sided military conflict; there's no reason South Korea can't do the same to North Korea.

4. The morale in the North Korean army can't be high. When your entire country is starving, your army won't have much morale. The morale in the South Korean army would probably be sky-high in almost all instances of a war.

Simply put, there's no way in hell North Korea could ever defeat South Korea. Chances a war, a war would result in the end of the Communist regime in North Korea seeing as the war would probably have the opposite effect. The myth of a future where North Korean tanks are driving toward Seoul is simply as said earlier, a myth. A more likely scenario is the image of South Korean soldiers patrolling Pyongyang.Such a massive knowledge of the South-North Korean Military.. You must be a -high ranking- South Korean Military General.

I say go for It -you cant lose- and I cant wait to get rid of the Axis-of-evil North Korea.

Just Go ahead an make my day.
Like Vetalia says: NK army will disintegrate..

Go get them tiger, Dont be a pussy, Dont make me wait.

JUST DO IT.

Sure. If North Korea has had a chance to fire one solid volley, a rather large number of people in Seoul are going to die.

How's that for odds?

Well that is what happens in surprise attacks. Many people usually die. Conceding that there will be a large loss of life and Seoul being turned into a smoking crater. I do believe there could be enough time to evacuate many citizens out of the city even if it were only a short warning.

A surprise attack is normally never a surprise really. Typically there would be a build up to hostilities. The only surprise would be when it happened. If the heat is turned up on the Korean peninsula believe me all eyes would be on the North. They wouldn't even be able to scratch their asses without the US knowing it. You may even see a pre-evacuation of Seoul to the south of the country in preparation for a likely attack. This would be most likely done by the citizens themselves concerned for their safety without government organization.

Seoul system of air raid shelters for a portion of Seoul's citizens.
Those shelters need to withstand almost 4,000,000 rounds of heavy artillery. Pardon me for being sceptical.

The sat's would detect movements by the North and give a little warning.
What movement? The guns have been targeted on the city for years. All that has to happen is the order to be given. I'm sure those guns are kept ready and prepped. It is North Korea we're talking about.
*click* There goes the first salvo. No warning. No time to relay anything from satellites to ground stations, to public access and information services, to get people under ground.

Either they can start on evacuation Seoul and or use a first strike option in the face of a imminent attack.
First strike is not an option. See above post for the reasons. How easy is it to evacuate 10 million people?

however there are countermeasures in dealing with a surprise attack.
None of which would matter to the South Koreans by this stage given their capital, government, a hefty portion of their military, any centralised local government etc would be wiped out.

There's a reason no one has fucked around with North Korea before.

Simply put, there's no way in hell North Korea could ever defeat South Korea. Chances a war, a war would result in the end of the Communist regime in North Korea seeing as the war would probably have the opposite effect. The myth of a future where North Korean tanks are driving toward Seoul is simply as said earlier, a myth. A more likely scenario is the image of South Korean soldiers patrolling Pyongyang.

North Korea wouldn't win a war of conquest, but it's opening moves, that being burning Seoul to the ground with massed artillery strikes means that even if South Korea wins, it loses.

We're talking about what, 40% of the population being blasted to kingdom come.

Seoul can easily be rebuilt. You are right about one thing 'one or two salvo's' and North Korea is gone.

A city can be rebuilt easily. The people? Not so much. Nice to see you sweeping the millions of dead under the rug like that.

Click Stand;12987120']That's why they should just launch a pre-emptive attack after evacuating Seoul. With surgical strikes they could keep civ. casualties to a minimum.

Yeah right. And North Korea would quietly sit there as South Korea evacuates Seoul. Regardless of what you think, they don't have vegetables for military leaders.

Your points are well taken, but you fail to grasp just how behind the NK army is technologically. We'd win, so long as we don't force their hand and they touch off a few nukes in a last-ditch counter-offensive. So long as we mine the crap out of all major open-country along the border and force them to travel through choak-points, we'll slaughter them. Don't fight harder, fight smarter. Also helps when we take out any bridges they could use and put JDAMS and Tomahawks on their logistics bases and centers of C3I (command, control, communication, intelligence).

You know what, maybe we should magically transport all those artillery pieces and missiles 60 kilometers off your home town and point them at you. Sure they'll be destroyed utterly.

But not before your personal behind is turned into burned out scraps of meat. See how much you advocate this sort of idiocy then.

People are less stupid when it's their backsides to the fire.

Yeah right. And North Korea would quietly sit there as South Korea evacuates Seoul. Regardless of what you think, they don't have vegetables for military leaders.

Ok I'll admit that evacuation of Seoul was a bit ambitious but if they co-ordinated with the US to destroy the artillery then SC would be able to hold the line and win the ground battle. Once again ambitious but much better than the other option of getting the city destroyed.

Of course this is only if tensions were mounting and a war was looking probable...which it's not.

Click Stand;12987639']Ok I'll admit that evacuation of Seoul was a bit ambitious but if they co-ordinated with the US to destroy the artillery then SC would be able to hold the line and win the ground battle. Once again ambitious but much better than the other option of getting the city destroyed.


This is no less ambitious, or implausible, than the last idea. North Korea has been on war footing since day 1 of the divide. Those guns aren't held in depots waiting to be wheeled out or anything. They're primed and ready, pointing in the right direction. All they need is someone to pull the trigger.

Do you think the US forces, who can't even ID friendly units before pulling the trigger or distinguish an embassy from an enemy camp, would be able to hit several thousand artillery positions completely in the space of what, two minutes it would take for the artillery barrage to begin?

The first instance of an artillery position blowing up would be the signal for the guns to open up and the troops to march.

And then coordinating the simultaneous evacuation of millions of people, who would have had no prior warning unless you want North Korea's intelligence agency to learn about it. People without warning, or even any preparation for the big escape. Who would be expected to leave their lives on the word of some soldier who busted down their door. Got a mind control device somewhere have we? Because if you don't, MILLIONS of people WILL die in this harebrained scheme.

Learn a bit more about how real war works. And get your mind on how many people would actually have to die because some stupid schmuck called it a "tactical error" or "collateral damage". Or better yet "We don't need a plan because it'll be all flowers and sunshine".

This is no less ambitious, or implausible, than the last idea. North Korea has been on war footing since day 1 of the divide. Those guns aren't held in depots waiting to be wheeled out or anything. They're primed and ready, pointing in the right direction. All they need is someone to pull the trigger.

Do you think the US forces, who can't even ID friendly units before pulling the trigger or distinguish an embassy from an enemy camp, would be able to hit several thousand artillery positions completely in the space of what, two minutes it would take for the artillery barrage to begin?

The first instance of an artillery position blowing up would be the signal for the guns to open up and the troops to march.

And then coordinating the simultaneous evacuation of millions of people, who would have had no prior warning unless you want North Korea's intelligence agency to learn about it. People without warning, or even any preparation for the big escape. Who would be expected to leave their lives on the word of some soldier who busted down their door. Got a mind control device somewhere have we? Because if you don't, MILLIONS of people WILL die in this harebrained scheme.

Learn a bit more about how real war works. And get your mind on how many people would actually have to die because some stupid schmuck called it a "tactical error" or "collateral damage". Or better yet "We don't need a plan because it'll be all flowers and sunshine".

Much more than two minutes for the targets to be taken out. We just need to hit communication first then the positions. I'd also like to know the source for you saying the US can't tell the difference between artillery and embassy.

Overall I know people will die, I'm just trying to find the way in which the least amount of people will die in this war.

The evacuation would be the hardest part but instead maybe the could be relocated to bunkers since those would be easily accessable.

Click Stand;12987697']Much more than two minutes for the targets to be taken out. We just need to hit communication first then the positions.

And all those pretty explosions won't be big bright flares in the sky saying "Something's fouled up big time"

And all their communications lines? At one go? Riiiiight.

Click Stand;12987697']
I'd also like to know the source for you saying the US can't tell the difference between artillery and embassy.

I said enemy camp and embassy, not artillery and embassy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Bombing_of_the_Chinese_embassy_in_Belgrade

Click Stand;12987697']
Overall I know people will die, I'm just trying to find the way in which the least amount of people will die in this war.

How about not having that damned war in the first place?

Click Stand;12987697']
The evacuation would be the hardest part but instead maybe the could be relocated to bunkers since those would be easily accessable.

Said bunkers won't do squat against a sustained barrage of over a million shells including biological and chemical warheads.

Also, those bunkers won't be able to house any more than just a fraction of Seoul's total population. And lets not forget the destruction of centralized government and military command and communications.

North Korea could lose Pyongyang in an instant, and all those guns would still fire. The same can't be said for South Korea's counterpart and defense as a coordinated force.

Well North Korea versus South Korea alone would be a tough one, in terms of troops the DPRK certainly outnumbers the RoK by a long shot, also in terms of tanks and armored vehicles, plus heavy artillery and the like, plus the North still has many planes and bombers. The thing is, most of their stuff is twenty years old. With Chinese air support they may be able to cover the advance of their forces reasonably well, but if the US got involved not so much.

The big question is, Seoul is within range of every artillery piece in the DPRK, if war did break out it would be flattened pretty quickly, it would be nasty also considering Seoul has massive high rise buildings and is densely populated etc, and the question remains, if Seoul is captured, will the South capitulate as they did before?

And all those pretty explosions won't be big bright flares in the sky saying "Something's fouled up big time"

I'm assuming if they see those explosions than they won't just fire and will probably wait for instuction from their commanders.

And all their communications lines? At one go? Riiiiight.

Just the communications that lead from the artillery to command.

How about not having that damned war in the first place?

I thought this was a hypothetical situation where war is unavoidable.

Said bunkers won't do squat against a sustained barrage of over a million shells including biological and chemical warheads.

It wouldn't be sustained, thats why we are taking them out remember.

As I said, evacuation is the hardest part. Another good way to do it is disguise it as a drill to calm the populace and not tip off NC. This has it's flaws like the rest of them but saving as many as possible is all I am trying to do.

Click Stand;12987828']I'm assuming if they see those explosions than they won't just fire and will probably wait for instuction from their commanders.

That doesn't always work. All it takes is for one guy to go "Oh crap! They're shooting! Shoot back" and that's the end of it. Once one guy fires, the rest will.

Click Stand;12987828']
Just the communications that lead from the artillery to command.


Where are they? How many are there? Are there any underground lines? How many redundant lines of communications do they have?

Besides, do you really think they haven't issued dead man orders to artillery commanders? If communications are destroyed or they're attacked, hit back with everything else? It's stupid to have that much ordnance pointed at someone as a retaliatory strikes without giving them the leeway to fight back once the bombs start falling.

Click Stand;12987828']
I thought this was a hypothetical situation where war is unavoidable.


No, the OPs thread was about "how my magic pixie dust will protect South Korea in the event of North Korean hostilities"

Click Stand;12987828']
It wouldn't be sustained, thats why we are taking them out remember.


A barrage that lasts 15 minutes is more than enough.

Click Stand;12987828']
As I said, evacuation is the hardest part. Another good way to do it is disguise it as a drill to calm the populace and not tip off NC. This has it's flaws like the rest of them but saving as many as possible is all I am trying to do.

You don't have city wide drills for mass evacuations on the capital of your nation. That just doesn't happen.

Imagine if it was in the cold war, and suddenly, every bigwig in Washington DC just went off to hide in some nuclear shelter. What do you think the USSR would have thought?

How the Viet Cong were recruited, tbh, and look what happened there :p

True, but a lot of people in the SK army, and most people in SK know life as they know it is over if the Communists win. Not to mention the amount of North Koreans defecting, switching sides, or surrendering should logically be extremely high.

Both very good points. Seems to me that the balance between nothing to lose and jealousy in the north versus pride and everything to lose in the south is what keeps the precarious balance teetering but not yet falling.

I'd be more worried about the North Korean population. 50 years of brainwashing tend to leave their marks.

China would not be willing to mobilize its entire army to support North Korea. Even if China sent a million (half of its standing army) into Korea, they would hideously outnumbered and outgunned by the South Koreans. It would not be even nearly enough to change the outcome of the war. Unless China commits itself to total war, something that will never happen, on the side of of North Korea, something also very unlikely, North Korea doesn't have a chance in hell.

And China doesn't really have a reason to protect North Korea. It's more in Chinese interests to see South Korea win.
On the contrary, China has a VERY pressing reason to keep the North intact, it's called not wanting the US to contain it. If the North falls, China is looking at a very large US force in Japan and a large one sitting on a LAND border to China. It isn't happy with the fact that US allies currently have borders and this would indeed piss it off because China has no intention of being contained like the USSR was.

Why do you think China has kept the North propped up? It ain't because of Communistic brotherly love.

Why don't the North Koreans invade already so we can finally settle on who is right on this topic.

Well I really doubt North Korean military planners are stupid, it would be best to disguise and hide artillery and missile positions in the Korean hills etc, or in caves or underground complexes. And in that case it would be quite hard to destroy them from the air.

Sure, South Korea and allies would win the war, but then what? German reunification was disastrous for East Germany -- close to seventeen years later, East Germany STILL feels the effects of being behind technologically and financially. Among other things, the government is investing 10 BILLION Euros a year developing it. If Germany still has problems like this, what do you think life will be like when the gap between north and south korea is ten times as big?
To be fair, it was disasterous for the West as well. I don't really think that anyone with any kind of sense would have WANTED German Reuinification, because it meant the loss of a way of life and most of the industry in the East, and billions of Western Marks down the drain, both of which could have been used to improve the lives of the citizens of the two states.

Well North Korea versus South Korea alone would be a tough one, in terms of troops the DPRK certainly outnumbers the RoK by a long shot
No, no it doesn't.

DPRK :

1,102,600 Active troops
5,995,000 Reservists

This is 22.9% of GDP, which North Korea can't actually afford even now.

South Korea :

686,000 Active troops
5,209,000 Reservists

This is 2.7% of South Korea's GDP, and hence can be expanded very quickly if need be.
also in terms of tanks and armored vehicles, plus heavy artillery and the like, plus the North still has many planes and bombers. The thing is, most of their stuff is twenty years old.
Erm.

And herein lies the problem. The North Koreans have staggeringly large amounts of artillery compared to the size of their forces, IIRC it's second only to Finland on that ground, on the other hand, it's crap, and their forces are underfed and undertrained.

SK, on the other hand, has a fairly modern force, with well-trained and well-fed forces, all of which are prepared pretty much all of the time.
With Chinese air support they may be able to cover the advance of their forces reasonably well, but if the US got involved not so much.
If China gets involved, so will the US.

Hence why this won't be happening.
The big question is, Seoul is within range of every artillery piece in the DPRK, if war did break out it would be flattened pretty quickly, it would be nasty also considering Seoul has massive high rise buildings and is densely populated etc, and the question remains, if Seoul is captured, will the South capitulate as they did before?
The South DIDN'T capitulate after the taking of Seoul. Hence the border being where it is.

Plus IIRC the SK forces have huge amounts of contingency plans for if Seoul is destroyed or captured.
Well I really doubt North Korean military planners are stupid, it would be best to disguise and hide artillery and missile positions in the Korean hills etc, or in caves or underground complexes. And in that case it would be quite hard to destroy them from the air.
...

I'm really sure that the North Korean generals have enough military acumen to know this at least... even I'd do that, and I've not been trained as a general...

The thing about caves and underground complexes is that they're a complete deathtrap if and when the enemy finds you. If the South Koreans had decent thermals on their planes, they'd be able to see where all of the North Korean artillery had fired and bomb the hell out of it, whilst it couldn't really escape.

The thing about caves and underground complexes is that they're a complete deathtrap if and when the enemy finds you. If the South Koreans had decent thermals on their planes, they'd be able to see where all of the North Korean artillery had fired and bomb the hell out of it, whilst it couldn't really escape.

NK's artillery setup isn't so much tactical or strategic purpose. It's more in line with Hitler's V-2s. Vengeance weapons. If they're invaded, they can can pretty much ruin SK. If they attack first, they'll lose in the long run, but they'll drag SK down with it.

It's basically a Mexican standoff. Except when both sides are using large caliber artillery, no one wins.

The only way to prevent NK from royally wrecking SK's northern infrastructure and most populace areas, including Seoul, would be for the US to strike the NK military with multiple, heavy tac-nuke strikes aimed at the elimination of command and control abilities and heavy weapon emplacements. These attacks would have to be carried out in near total secrecy, and the launches would have to be from SLBM platforms and cruise missiles, so as to provide no window of opportunity for NK to realise it was under attack.

In the current climate, this will not happen.

In the unlikely event of a second Korean war, it is impossible to foresee a situation where North Korea could be victorious or even threaten South Korea. South Korea's security simply is ensured. There is no power both capable and willing of launching a successful invasion of South Korea in East Asia. Communist domination of Korea is simply an impossible scenario.

1. South Korea has a military budget over four times that of North Korea.

2. South Korea's army has numerical parity with North Korea, as well as a far larger manpower pool.

3. South Korea is literally forty years ahead of North Korea in terms of technology. The difference between the USA and Iraq was NOTHING compared to the difference between South and North Korea. The technological gap is almost unbearably high. The USA army smashed Hussein's army in a highly one-sided military conflict; there's no reason South Korea can't do the same to North Korea.

4. The morale in the North Korean army can't be high. When your entire country is starving, your army won't have much morale. The morale in the South Korean army would probably be sky-high in almost all instances of a war.

Simply put, there's no way in hell North Korea could ever defeat South Korea. Chances a war, a war would result in the end of the Communist regime in North Korea seeing as the war would probably have the opposite effect. The myth of a future where North Korean tanks are driving toward Seoul is simply as said earlier, a myth. A more likely scenario is the image of South Korean soldiers patrolling Pyongyang.


I think that the North Korean military's morale is not as simple a thing to gauge as you suspect. North Koreans have been exposed to a ton of propoganda. I read an interview of a prison guard who defected and other sources that suggest that the North Korean soldier may have a pretty high morale.

The USSR faced famine in WWII and I think they were pretty motivated. Out forces in Valley Forge came out of starvation and attacked Trenton with lots of enthusiasm.

NK's artillery setup isn't so much tactical or strategic purpose. It's more in line with Hitler's V-2s. Vengeance weapons. If they're invaded, they can can pretty much ruin SK.Hitler, Bush and the other 4 UNSC "permanents".

The only way to prevent NK from royally wrecking SK's northern infrastructure and most populace areas, including Seoul, would be for the US to strike the NK military with multiple, heavy tac-nuke strikes aimed at the elimination of command and control abilities and heavy weapon emplacements. These attacks would have to be carried out in near total secrecy, and the launches would have to be from SLBM platforms and cruise missiles, so as to provide no window of opportunity for NK to realise it was under attack.

In the current climate, this will not happen.

Given the sheer amount of targets you'd need to wipe out, you'd probably end up glassing a 100 mile wide zone of Korea. This is generally considered a bad thing.

And I don't even know what channeling effect the mountains might have.

South Korea would own.

ROK Marines are badass, 'nuff said.

Edit: Plus South Korea would have America's backing

Double Edit: Plus there's very little chance China would back North Korea in the event. Especially if the US was involved

Triple Edit: It doesn't really matter anyway, because China's military is a joke. I know they have high manpower, but even most of their Category A units don't have enough vehicles and weapons per man. And they do have some well-trained, skilled units, but mostly their training methods are out-of-date and their servicemen are not taken care of well at all.

Technically, the two Koreas are still at war...

A South Korean victory is pretty much guaranteed if the fighting flares up again, but there will be many casualties -- it's safe to assume that Kim Jong-Il would fire off missiles -- quite possibly at Soeul, Pusan, and other urban palces -- before he'd let a single missile be captured. There's also the fact that gaining control of North Korea is about as useful financially as gaining control of Greenland. Maybe I'm exaggerating a bit, but remember that we're dealing with a nation whose poverty is normally found only in africa.

A north Korean invasion of the south would bring about the end of North Korea.

I think the general estimates are north korea having 3-5 days of offensive actions, a further 10-14 days of holding its own, then getting its ass kicked as South Korea mobilises and the US begins pouring troops and material into the country.
The fanatics of the communist party would retreat north and start fighting a partisan war, but as the truth about life in north and south korea comes out, I guess they'd lose a lot of support.

However kim jong loony has a love of power..... he does'nt want to give that up.... so any north korean invasion of the south is right out..... at least for the next 6 hrs:eek:

at least for the next 6 hrs:eek:

What do you mean at least for the next 6 hours? Do you know something we don't...

They don't.

This issue is not weather North Korea would win a war with the South (+ the US), the issue is how much damage would be done to the ROK before the DPRK would be subdued.

(prolly been said before, but I like repeating things)

So for stating the obvious here, but these hypothetical war debates always end badly with meaningless 'NAWR COMMIEZ R TEH SUX' trolling and no consensus, the fact is: their is no war going on now.

So for stating the obvious here, but these hypothetical war debates always end badly with meaningless 'NAWR COMMIEZ R TEH SUX' trolling and no consensus, the fact is: their is no war going on now.

Not according to Dear Leader Kim Jong-il.

So for stating the obvious here, but these hypothetical war debates always end badly with meaningless 'NAWR COMMIEZ R TEH SUX' trolling and no consensus, the fact is: their is no war going on now.
Um... Yes there is. There has never been a peace treaty between the North and the South. They both remain in a state of war.

Im wondering whats taking so long for like 100,000 NKs to just rush the border all at once and get assylum. I mean how many could the border guards actually stop?

1 something triggers a spark on oil feild and boom the fire's on, the SK capitol is gone within hours millions dead already the DPRK has over run the DMZ
2 some time in to the war U.S Reinforcements arrive stretching the U.S army even more, they manage to stop the DPRK's attack
3 China see's that the United States Military is spread out all over the world and thin to so it takes it chance along with possible Russian help mostly navy to blockade taiwan, it attacks and retakes Taiwan it uses its U.N veto ability to stop a attack which leaves only the U.S and maybe Britian
5 the DPRK is about to lose and the actions of that means millions of refugees in china this could mean trouble for china's booming economy so it flexes its muscle(very big muscle) again and invades the DPRK, once again using its U.N veto ability to stop a attack but this dosent stop the U.S but the U.S dosen't go to war with china it just gives South Korea a hell of a lot of arms to fight them with and Russia gives china a hell of a lot of arms and of course with at least 15 million soilders all together south korea loses and the PRC engulf the DPRK as another one of its territories.
now China controls both Taiwan and the former DPRK but that isn't a big deal it just took a breakaway state back and is helping a struggling people of course the United States dosen't get its way and it throws a tantrum calling china an "EVIL EMPIRE" and probaly attacks a little country and gets its ass kicked once again

Im wondering whats taking so long for like 100,000 NKs to just rush the border all at once and get assylum. I mean how many could the border guards actually stop?

If you can get 100,000 people to rush the border without being killed by the government first, then I commend you.;)

Im wondering whats taking so long for like 100,000 NKs to just rush the border all at once and get assylum. I mean how many could the border guards actually stop?

There are a lot of landmines in the DMZ. A whole big mess of them. And South Korea is starting to put up automated turrets to bolster border defense.

That's a 100,000 dead people waiting to happen if they rush.

Im wondering whats taking so long for like 100,000 NKs to just rush the border all at once and get assylum. I mean how many could the border guards actually stop?
*back in the towns where most of the 100,000 would be coming from*

Soldier : "Where are you going?"
Escapee-to-be : "Erm... just... having a wonder around..."
Soldier : "Get back to your house before I shoot you"

This is why this wouldn't happen.

*back in the towns where most of the 100,000 would be coming from*

Soldier : "Where are you going?"
Escapee-to-be : "Erm... just... having a wonder around..."
Soldier : "Get back to your house before I shoot you"

This is why this wouldn't happen.

Sorry but even in NK there isnt a soldier in front of every residences door. And you could landmine and automate machineguns all day long. A mass rush of humanity pretty much can beat any border on the planet, mines and machineguns not withstanding.

1 something triggers a spark on oil feild and boom the fire's on, the SK capitol is gone within hours millions dead already the DPRK has over run the DMZ
2 some time in to the war U.S Reinforcements arrive stretching the U.S army even more, they manage to stop the DPRK's attack
3 China see's that the United States Military is spread out all over the world and thin to so it takes it chance along with possible Russian help mostly navy to blockade taiwan, it attacks and retakes Taiwan it uses its U.N veto ability to stop a attack which leaves only the U.S and maybe Britian
5 the DPRK is about to lose and the actions of that means millions of refugees in china this could mean trouble for china's booming economy so it flexes its muscle(very big muscle) again and invades the DPRK, once again using its U.N veto ability to stop a attack but this dosent stop the U.S but the U.S dosen't go to war with china it just gives South Korea a hell of a lot of arms to fight them with and Russia gives china a hell of a lot of arms and of course with at least 15 million soilders all together south korea loses and the PRC engulf the DPRK as another one of its territories.
now China controls both Taiwan and the former DPRK but that isn't a big deal it just took a breakaway state back and is helping a struggling people of course the United States dosen't get its way and it throws a tantrum calling china an "EVIL EMPIRE" and probaly attacks a little country and gets its ass kicked once again

You owe me like 1000 braincells since after reading that I am now dumber than I was 10 seconds ago...

A mass rush of humanity pretty much can beat any border on the planet, mines and machineguns not withstanding.

Yes, because mass infantry rushes worked soooo well in the trenches of the First World War. :rolleyes:

Lets use a standard heavy machinegun, the M2 Browning. A range of 1.8 km and 500 rounds a minute. At a one kilometer stretch with 5 MG nests, that's 2,500 rounds a minute. Lets be generous and say that only 1 round in 5 hits someone. So that's 500 effective kills/immobilizations per minute. How far can a healthy man run in a minute? I doubt it's not anywhere near 1.8km. And the average NK layman is far from a healthy specimen of humanity, considering the poor agricultural conditions. Let's say 300 meters in a minute. 6 minutes.

That's 3,000 dead assuming these North Koreans were Energizer bunnies that kept on going, and going, and going, and going by the time they reach the nest and never fell down.

But they're human. So they'll stumble. Some will run back. Many will fall down. Quite a few will take a round, and not slow it enough to prevent the person behind taking the same round.

And then we add in anti-personnel mines. Those things tend to take down more than one person in a blast, especially if they're clumped.

Conclusion: The escapees are better off quietly swallowing a knife.

Machineguns were built exactly to counter massed infantry rushes. And these poor sods wouldn't even be armed, or have massed artillery backing them.

You owe me like 1000 braincells since after reading that I am now dumber than I was 10 seconds ago...

Funny.... i dont actully believe that anything like that would ever happen but look at its basics, with the united state's army all spread over the place if a
2nd korean war(or a continue of this 1 i should say) the U.S military would spread way to thin to stop the chinese recapture of taiwan and dont even try to tell me that china wouldn't try something with north korea if something happened(like the goverments collapse) that would sent millions of refugees into its borders i mean thats a spell of hard economic struggle for the chinese so wouldn't it be better for the chinese to just take north korea give its populace a peice of the chinese fortune, taking north korea would be way better than just millions of people coming into their country, and if you dont agree with me on what the U.S would do look at it's past the U.S is a bunch of imperialist, war mongering, cry babies that if they dont get what they want they blame someone else, so maybe not like that, i dont believe what i posted but the basics are set in stone.

And South Korea would probably have ours (U.S.).

The US cannot defeat China, just as China cannot defeat the US.


We both have nuclear weapons, so any "open war" scenario would be immediately thrown out the window, as neither nations would want to resort to nuclear disaster.

However, China could very well support NK, and because of their obvious geographic advantage, including their overwhelming number of ground troops (which are required for the capturing and maintaining of seized territory), a combined force of NK and China could operate a modern day blitzkrieg and dominate the majority of the Korean peninsula before the US and its allies could assemble a formidable counterstrike force.

IMHO

They don't have a chance...but that's not what people are really worried about. The North Korean military is badly underequipped, outdated, and poorly nourished by world standards, and their economy is nowhere near capable of supporting any kind of prolonged military conflict...they'll lose for certain. However, the concern is that they'll be able to launch a surprise attack and kill hundreds of thousands or even millions of civilians in Seoul and other places near the border before the South Korean and US forces can defeat them. A lot of people don't necessarily realize how close the capitol is to the border; even if the North Koreans don't win the war, they'll be able to pillage and ruin the border regions before they're stopped.

China's not going to support them in a war, that's for sure; they've got a lot more to lose than to gain by supporting a backward hellhole like North Korea against the wealthy South. I'm sure they'd more or less remain neutral or even move in to the North to reconstruct it in a more favorable vein; the prospect of a China-Korea transportation and trade corridor is highly intriguing as is the sheer potential of the underdeveloped North Korean market.

Here's a simple fact: China generates $132 billion in bilateral trade with SK. The amount with NK is so small it's not even listed.

Thank you for providing a post that's informed, reasonable and intelligent. That's rather been lacking. You're entirely right on all those points, of course.

Isn't anyone concerned of the casualties North Korea would suffer? They're, y'know, as much people like you and me as the South Koreans?


Sadly, a lot of people find it very difficult to distinguish between a country's population and its leaders. Thank you for bringing that issue up. Of course the civilian casualties both sides would suffer would be horrendous and tragic.

Im wondering whats taking so long for like 100,000 NKs to just rush the border all at once and get assylum. I mean how many could the border guards actually stop?

a) The entire border is mined. Over a large area. And heavily militarised.
b) It's not just a question of getting to the border, which in itself would be difficult. It's a question of those not living near the border getting to the south of the country. Movement within North Korea is restricted via a Soviet-style system of "internal passports". They wouldn't be able to use public transport, and few have cars. What do they do, walk, and immediately get stopped?
c) How do they coordinate this rush "all at once"?
d) A huge majority of North Koreans wouldn't want to leave the country. Most North Koreans were born under the current system, with no access to any kind of news or information beyond what the government provides them with. They're heavily brainwashed, and most genuinely do support their government for that reason.

Anyway... This entire question is purely academic. Neither Korea is going to renew hostilities.

North Korea is heavily dependent on South Korean aid for its very survival. South Korea pumps massive amounts of aid into the North.

Contrary to popular misconception in the West, relations between the two countries, while undeniably tense, and generally good, and improving. A lot of people in the West seem to think Pyongyang and Seoul aren't talking to each other. They're actually talking all the time and working on (mostly token) collaborative projects. South Korea is, paradoxically, one of North Korea's closest "allies" and biggest aid donor. Another thing many people in the West don't seem to realise is that South Koreans and North Koreans (by which I mean ordinary people) feel little hostility towards one another. The idea of "We're all Koreans, we're all one people and one nation" is VERY strong over there.

I was in Seoul just a few weeks ago. There's little or no fear of the North there. The media talk about good relations between North and South Korea, never about the Northern "threat". You may remember that, when Bush visited South Korea and talked about the US "defending" South Korea against the North, there was significant anger in the South (and a large protest movement) about Bush's statement, perceived by South Koreans as ignorant and provocative.

This doesn't mean that there is no cause for concern whatsoever. Clearly the Korean peninsula is sitting on a potentially tense and explosive situation. But increasingly good relations within the pensinsula, feelings on both sides, the balance of power, the fact that any war would cause millions of casualties on both sides, annihilate the North and cripple the South, and the North's reliance on the South's aid and good will, means that any prospect of a war started by either Korea is EXTREMELY unlikely.

Yes, because mass infantry rushes worked soooo well in the trenches of the First World War. :rolleyes:

Lets use a standard heavy machinegun, the M2 Browning. A range of 1.8 km and 500 rounds a minute. At a one kilometer stretch with 5 MG nests, that's 2,500 rounds a minute. Lets be generous and say that only 1 round in 5 hits someone. So that's 500 effective kills/immobilizations per minute. How far can a healthy man run in a minute? I doubt it's not anywhere near 1.8km. And the average NK layman is far from a healthy specimen of humanity, considering the poor agricultural conditions. Let's say 300 meters in a minute. 6 minutes.

That's 3,000 dead assuming these North Koreans were Energizer bunnies that kept on going, and going, and going, and going by the time they reach the nest and never fell down.

But they're human. So they'll stumble. Some will run back. Many will fall down. Quite a few will take a round, and not slow it enough to prevent the person behind taking the same round.

And then we add in anti-personnel mines. Those things tend to take down more than one person in a blast, especially if they're clumped.

Conclusion: The escapees are better off quietly swallowing a knife.

Machineguns were built exactly to counter massed infantry rushes. And these poor sods wouldn't even be armed, or have massed artillery backing them.

Meh not buying it. First of all the border isnt anywhere NEAR 1.8 km wide and neither do they have a 1.8km clear line of sight and once people get past the nests they arnt going to start shooting backwards. Secondly i doubledare you to find someone willing to even open machinegun fire on 100,000 incoming crazed starving people and not just turn and run like hell. And even using your figure of 3,000 deaths lets get crazy and multiply your estimate of its effectiveness by 500% Thats killing 15% of of the crowd. The same 15% that will probably be dead from lack of food or be sent off to the labor camps anyway. Im not buying your math sorry.

And to compare a minefield and a few machine gun nests and a few guards to WWI trenches supported by hundreds of thousands of weapons poison gas and tens of thousands of troops all bunched into a heavy combat area...not exactly comparing apples to apples now are we.

Thank you for providing a post that's informed, reasonable and intelligent. That's rather been lacking. You're entirely right on all those points, of course.



Sadly, a lot of people find it very difficult to distinguish between a country's population and its leaders. Thank you for bringing that issue up. Of course the civilian casualties both sides would suffer would be horrendous and tragic.



a) The entire border is mined. Over a large area. And heavily militarised.
b) It's not just a question of getting to the border, which in itself would be difficult. It's a question of those not living near the border getting to the south of the country. Movement within North Korea is restricted via a Soviet-style system of "internal passports". They wouldn't be able to use public transport, and few have cars. What do they do, walk, and immediately get stopped?
c) How do they coordinate this rush "all at once"?
d) A huge majority of North Koreans wouldn't want to leave the country. Most North Koreans were born under the current system, with no access to any kind of news or information beyond what the government provides them with. They're heavily brainwashed, and most genuinely do support their government for that reason.

Anyway... This entire question is purely academic. Neither Korea is going to renew hostilities.

North Korea is heavily dependent on South Korean aid for its very survival. South Korea pumps massive amounts of aid into the North.

Contrary to popular misconception in the West, relations between the two countries, while undeniably tense, and generally good, and improving. A lot of people in the West seem to think Pyongyang and Seoul aren't talking to each other. They're actually talking all the time and working on (mostly token) collaborative projects. South Korea is, paradoxically, one of North Korea's closest "allies" and biggest aid donor. Another thing many people in the West don't seem to realise is that South Koreans and North Koreans (by which I mean ordinary people) feel little hostility towards one another. The idea of "We're all Koreans, we're all one people and one nation" is VERY strong over there.

I was in Seoul just a few weeks ago. There's little or no fear of the North there. The media talk about good relations between North and South Korea, never about the Northern "threat". You may remember that, when Bush visited South Korea and talked about the US "defending" South Korea against the North, there was significant anger in the South (and a large protest movement) about Bush's statement, perceived by South Koreans as ignorant and provocative.

This doesn't mean that there is no cause for concern whatsoever. Clearly the Korean peninsula is sitting on a potentially tense and explosive situation. But increasingly good relations within the pensinsula, feelings on both sides, the balance of power, the fact that any war would cause millions of casualties on both sides, annihilate the North and cripple the South, and the North's reliance on the South's aid and good will, means that any prospect of a war started by either Korea is EXTREMELY unlikely.


That's assuming that either Korean leaders are of enough of a stable mind to understand that a renewed war would be devestating.

The largest saving grace that keeps NK from being even a bigger pain in the ass that they already are is they have constant shitty weather so they are always in disaster mode with homelessness and starvation.

North Korea is largely a nonissue-they have nukes, but no delivery system for effective use of same. If they should initiate hostilities, it would be a despration move to prevent an internal collapse and civil war.
North Korea's only advantage is that there is political hay to make in the US by overemphasizing NK's threat level, and the US press is so heavily co-opted by those who can score off the "threat" of NK that every Korean move makes headlines.
North Korea's tests have had laughable results, which merely affirms they are a bully in a clubhouse with a baseball bat-troublesome but endurable and not worth the effort of removing.

Meh not buying it. First of all the border isnt anywhere NEAR 1.8 km wide and neither do they have a 1.8km clear line of sight and once people get past the nests they arnt going to start shooting backwards. Secondly i doubledare you to find someone willing to even open machinegun fire on 100,000 incoming crazed starving people and not just turn and run like hell. And even using your figure of 3,000 deaths lets get crazy and multiply your estimate of its effectiveness by 500% Thats killing 15% of of the crowd. The same 15% that will probably be dead from lack of food or be sent off to the labor camps anyway. Im not buying your math sorry.

And to compare a minefield and a few machine gun nests and a few guards to WWI trenches supported by hundreds of thousands of weapons poison gas and tens of thousands of troops all bunched into a heavy combat area...not exactly comparing apples to apples now are we.

You know, the few times people actually got through heavy machinegun fire was often to do with good weather and good luck. Omaha Beach actually comes to mind, as the defenders didn't get reinforcements, because they didn't know an attack was coming.

A lot of people died in WWI and WWII due to machinegun fire. It was not at all uncommon that a few machineguns should be able to hold off a wave or two on a clear day.

Meh not buying it.

See my reply above.


First of all the border isnt anywhere NEAR 1.8 km wide


It's actually 4km, more or less, so about 2km on either side.


Secondly i doubledare you to find someone willing to even open machinegun fire on 100,000 incoming crazed starving people and not just turn and run like hell.


Run where? Towards the South Korean and American soldiers who'll shoot you? Plus if your armed officer is telling you to shoot, and you're a NK soldier, my guess is you do as you're told.

The question is academic anyway, and would never happen, for reasons I explained clearly earlier.


And even using your figure of 3,000 deaths lets get crazy and multiply your estimate of its effectiveness by 500% Thats killing 15% of of the crowd. The same 15% that will probably be dead from lack of food or be sent off to the labor camps anyway. Im not buying your math sorry.


Not everyone in NK gets sent to labour camps. :rolleyes: For the rest, see the points I made earlier.


And to compare a minefield and a few machine gun nests and a few guards to WWI trenches supported by hundreds of thousands of weapons poison gas and tens of thousands of troops all bunched into a heavy combat area...not exactly comparing apples to apples now are we.

You ARE aware, I hope, that it's by far the most heavily militarised border anywhere in the world? A million heavily armed North Korean soldiers is not "a few guards".

Meh not buying it.


You don't have to. It's a factual reality. Belief won't change nuts.


First of all the border isnt anywhere NEAR 1.8 km wide and neither do they have a 1.8km clear line of sight and once people get past the nests they arnt going to start shooting backwards.


Because you've been to the DMZ?


Secondly i doubledare you to find someone willing to even open machinegun fire on 100,000 incoming crazed starving people and not just turn and run like hell.


Let's see. Maybe not starving crazed people, but armed people who shot back. The Great War. The Second World War, Russian front. Vietnam along American firebases.

In this scenario of yours? North Korean border guards. American border guards. South Korean border guards.

That's a lot more than 5 machineguns between the bunch of them.

We're talking about a species who walked in neat orderly lines across a battlefield complete with band music while cannon shells ripped holes in their lines and formed firing squads at another line of people and shot each other.

Shooting a mass of charging people? Easy.


And even using your figure of 3,000 deaths lets get crazy and multiply your estimate of its effectiveness by 500% Thats killing 15% of of the crowd. The same 15% that will probably be dead from lack of food or be sent off to the labor camps anyway. Im not buying your math sorry.


You didn't factor in landmines. And are assuming these people are machines incapable of feeling fear and pain. They aren't.

And might I remind you that machineguns are hardly the most lethal weapon in the DMZ? There's all manner of mortars and short to medium range artillery there. A mass rush of 100,000 people would be easy pickings for artillery and airstrikes.

Oh yes. And that they can float through the piled dead in front of them.

A more realistic scenario would put 50% or higher immediately killed, with about another 40% suffering fatal wounds from shrapnel and the like. The remaining 9.5% would be hiding out in the woods until the guards got them. Maybe that 0.5% would be able to make it across.

And as heavily brainwashed as they are, I doubt they have any illusions of the effects of being shot. How would you organize a 100,000 person rush when you have to tell them "We're going to rush this. Only a handful of you will make it, and as for the rest of you? Tough cheese"

People want to live. Even if the choice is between a slow death and a quick one.

Arridia has outlined the rest of the problems.

See why your idea is unworkable now?


And to compare a minefield and a few machine gun nests and a few guards to WWI trenches supported by hundreds of thousands of weapons poison gas and tens of thousands of troops all bunched into a heavy combat area...not exactly comparing apples to apples now are we.

Tens of thousands of troops who had bolt action rifles. A machinegun removes the need for tens of thousands of slow firing weapon by having a high rate of fire. Poison gas? Not really practical since most infantry then had masks, and then you have to remember that a good wind would blow it away. They were only good against entrenched positions.

As for how many people guarding it, we're talking about a place that is almost as heavily fortified as the border between Europe and Russia before the Soviet Union got nukes.

If anything, it's like the Berlin wall, only without the concrete wall but everything else.

What do you mean at least for the next 6 hours? Do you know something we don't...

Well known fact fior us North Korea watchers

Kim jong loony holds his head every 6 hrs and goes ''hnnnnnnnrrrrr r make the voices stop!"

Followed by 'nnnneeieieieiieeeeeearggghhh' as he accidently sends another minion into the piranha pool

As for North Korea vs South Korea & the rest of the world....... think a WW1 infantry attack vs 100 000 terminators armed with miniguns.
A lot of smoke, a lot of noise and at the end 1 000 000 dead North koreans

El-Presidente Boris

And a lot of empty shell casings