North Korea VS USA.

[ZenOps]

Assuming use of nukes was not allowed, who would win?

It would be hard for North Korea to "win", but I get the feeling they could bring the US to a "tie", kind of like Vietnam (Vietnam, arguably should have been a walk in the park for the US)

[KRyn]

This film doesn't account for the technological advantage the US has across the board. I have a feeling if anything happened it would be a lot like Desert Storm.

[Tik-Tok]

Glorious leader would annihilate filthy American military with one look.

[nonofyobiz]

I wonder where these ppl get their facts on the N.Korean military that they actually think is truth

[Gman.45]

IMO the defensive problem for S Korea and NATO is very difficult should a war ever begin. This is due to the center of gravity for the entire southern defense, it's purpose, is Seoul, and it's already in range of 10s of thousands of artillery tubes and rockets from the instant war begins.

No modern tech or air power in the world can suppress or destroy that much arty which is already pre positioned in very well built defensive fortifications, and zeroed in on Seoul and other nearby targets. Should the DPRK ever launch a first strike, the South will take a hard one on the chin just by the nature of surprise, and the fact that the primary target, Seoul, is well within long range guns and cheap plentiful free flight over ground type rockets.

Of course will all the modern space and air based surveillance systems, it would be difficult for the DPRK to move and stage a lot of its forces near the DMZ for a surprise attack, but they often do this when the South has large exercises already.

The unpredictable factors are many, but it would be very foolish to write the DPRK off due to tech inferiority - they have a large, very large and motivated to the point of fanatic loyalty force. The South is tough as well, the Southern Korean forces I've worked with are 2nd to none in terms of discipline and ability. But they will always be on the defense, waiting for an assault, as I don't imagine a Southern Gov ever willing to attack the DPRK first, at least with ground forces in a large push. This gives the DPRK a massive advantage they can use at will, and again, the first volleys alone will kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of things should they ever get it in their head that war is the best option.

I actually think with Kim Jong Un in command, the chance of war is less so now than it was under his father. He likes Western stuff a lot, and is young, and enjoys the high life - he has to know all that will go away if he ever pushes the button.

[CapnCrunch]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Glorious leader would annihilate filthy American military with one look.

HE WOULD SODOMIZE OBAMA WITH UNICORN HORN

[ZenOps]

I would have said that the US had a massive air advantage over any nation, right until about 2010 because the ten aircraft carriers.

But with the advancement in technology in drones, much much smaller boats can be used as launching pads - even larger submarines could be used as drone launchers. Giving distinct aerial advantage to small and submersible naval platforms. Of which DPRK has tons of.

One submersible drone aircraft carrier, might just trump three aging US manned aircraft carriers - by my estimation.

If Canada could engineer a ginormous flat top submarine that could still evade detection, and put a few hundred or thousand drones on it - I'd bet it would beat a US manned carrier anyday.

[Gman.45]

Weaponizing a drone is a completely different matter than one that just tools around doing ISR work. DPRK would have to create advanced systems that can find, identify, and the target and strike things for drones to be of any offensive use for them.

Don't get me wrong, small weaponized drones of all sizes, down to the almost microscopic, are the future, it's just that even the USA isn't there yet, much less the DPRK. You still have to put weapons on the hordes of drones, and due to their size they are very limited in striking power compared to current manned aircraft. You can have large drones with similar strike ability, but they cost more than the fighters now - you can have small cheap disposable self guiding kamikaze type drones, but due to being small and cheap, they are limited in their ability to inflict damage due to small warhead sizes.

Each Super Hornet can easily carry 4 2000lb class weapons, along with 4 air to air missiles for self escort/defense/offense. Even the largest combat drones out there can only carry about 1/4 or 1/8 of that load right now. See, to make attack drones as you're describing ZenOps, they must be cheap, they need to be small and disposable, and that limits the amount of ordnance and firepower they can have.

Essentially nothing you're saying is wrong ZenOps IMO, it's just that it's still in the future a ways, and the day of the manned fighter and carrier air wings will be here for a while still.

I personally don't think they'll really come into their own as offensive weapons that will replace air power until the directed energy weapon systems mature. And that is also coming quickly. A drone with a DE weapon won't need to rely on hauling heavy ass bombs, with future power systems and DE weaponry, a drone will be able to fire nearly countless shots at targets, and then tool off on its own to refuel from other drone tanker aircraft, and then go back to the battle area and continue lasing and destroying targets over and over. That is the future of aerial warfare IMO, but we aren't there yet, so manned fighters and CVN air groups will be important and necessary for the remainder of our generations lifetime.

Regarding attack submarines, the US for over a decade has been using sub launched cheap disposable recon drones, as it allows the sub to stay covert under the thermocline layer and let the drone do all the ISR work. They also have weaponized drones to use vs enemy ASW helicopters, the submarines greatest threat. This isn't really open source, but will be soon enough. However, finding a single helo out to sea is a much easier task for sensors than finding, id'ing, then hitting ground targets, at least for autonomous drones. But it's coming fast. Just not for the DPRK IMO.

Their subs, while mostly small units, are still a credible threat. South Korea found that out 4 years ago when it lost a Corvette with 1/2 the crew to a min sub launched torpedo.


I would also say that the DPRK if and when they field their ICBM in a sub, even a shorter ranged Diesel/electric boat, will be a huge, huge threat and game changer for them. Best case scenario is every time it puts to sea it'll eat up an expensive asset (US or NATO SSN sub) to monitor it constantly, which is a big deal in the area all on its own.

I still think the world is a long way off from writing off the striking power of the CVNs the USA have. Once the newest ship is online, they'll have 10 or possibly 11 nuclear powered CVN battle groups, along with close to 2 dozen assault ships, of which probably 8 will be able to field the F35B, a major strike asset in the near future.

[ZenOps]

I also always thought of the US military as *extreme maintenance*

Seriously, even a US civilian needs a tenth of a barrel of oil, and filtered water to survive. An effective US mobilization might require one or two barrels of oil per person per day.

At the complete opposite end of the spectrum is the North Korean soldier, who is no maintainance. Can survive on no oil, much like a Vietnamese sniper who can remain in a foxhole for years.

At first sign of any disruption in oil supplies for a single day, of a mosquito carrying a little bit of disease, and some unfiltered sandy water - I'd say the US soldier is at an extreme disadvantage.

[ekguy]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Glorious leader would annihilate filthy American military with one look.

that seems like an awful lot of effort on his part to accomplish something so huge...figured it would only take a slight thought of his to destroy the universe.

[ZenOps]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/assessi...-korea/5339792

Canadian analysis is more realistic in the Tank numbers.

I always thought that if North Korea and one solid strategic oil producing ally could work together, they would make a formidable force that could definitely take a run at the US for global military dominance.

It would all come down to how easily (difficult) it would be to mobilize ground forces over the ocean.

And of course, the US dollar being able to buy mercenaries is a huge bonus on the US side. For as long as the US dollar has dominance that also is definitely more likely to be an assured win for the USA.

Mind you, if the US is in three or more conflict zones around the world - Kim Jong Junior could always make a run on US soil... Its not outside the realm of possibility there could be a few battles won and a few US states lost.

If North Korea invaded Mexico, I'd pretty much say North Korea would win in two weeks. Not that Mexico and North Korea are enemies, or even know each other - But Europeans didn't really get to know the natives in the US before wiping them out either.

North Korea could then use Mexico as a staging ground to take over Texas, which if captured would probably tip the scales in favour of a NK sucessful invasion.

[ZenOps]

To keep thread going until next month (when I get the feeling NK will hit the news pretty hard)

Strange factoid:

"Pueblo, still held by North Korea today, officially remains a commissioned vessel of the United States Navy.[3] Since early 2013, the ship has been moored along the Botong River in Pyongyang, and used there as a museum ship.[4] Pueblo is the only ship of the U.S. Navy still on the commissioned roster currently being held captive."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Pueblo_(AGER-2)

North Korea currently holds the title of capturing a US military vessel that is still considered active in the US navy. The only reason to keep it active for the last 47 years, is that the US navy intends to re-acquire it someday.

[cancer man]

Never going to happen Zenops you war monger. Hunching nickel will triple in price...lol
The jews will go to war first, my prediction all hell breaks out 2018.

[Nitro5]

In the end how loyal will NK troops be to Dear Leader. Saddam's troops were supposed to be fanatical, but they readily surrendered simply because they knew they would get food.

[ZenOps]

I do wonder how much of a military force the US would give to Mexico if it were invaded.

Under Obama, it appears he is trying to gain public support from Mexicans by making all the millions of illegal immigrants, legal.

Then again, there are some in the Southern US states who really don't like illegals, and might not mind *as much* if a European or Asian nation took it over. Would the US back a Mexican invasion with nukes? I'd think not. Would the US use nukes to protect itself, yes. Would Texas give a thumbs up to Britain taking over Mexico? Would Texas give a thumbs up on Kim Jong 3'rd taking over Mexico?

As a mexican, do you really want to ally yourself with the US? I mean really - they have treated the entire Mexican population as third or fourth class citizens for hundreds of years. It might not be on the outside realm of possibility, that an Asian or European nation is allowed to build a military base in Mexico as an ally and friend.

On that note: The US mostly treats Canadian citizens as second class citizens, not third or fourth.... I wonder if that is comforting or disturbing.