The last resort: How a US strike on North Korea could play out

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by shinji, Aug 11, 2017.

  1. shinji, Aug 11, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #1
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/11/politics/us-north-korea-strike-first/index.html

    Interesting overview of how analysts believe a hypothetical strike on North Korea would go down. Hopefully this will never happen:

     
  2. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #2
    Frankly, after reading the article I doubt Trump would take any of the logistics or casualties into consideration. It would be an unprecedented **** show. Jesus Christ...
     
  3. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #3
    The biggest issue with NK is their ability to inflict real damage on SK very quickly. Similar situations have not been the case in the Gulf. Plus the guy in NK is a wildcard so we have no idea what he will do. Yes, I know a lot of people think Trump is a wildcard, but he is not going to set off a nuke in that close of proximity to himself. Nut boy over there just might.
     
  4. Zedcars, Aug 11, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    Zedcars macrumors 6502

    Zedcars

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Location:
    Brighton, UK
    #4
    Seems to me the most effective form of defence is computer based; hack Kim's missiles before they launch. Is there any point in launching physical weaponry against a very real and immediate nuclear threat? Even a pre-emptive strike would cause them to launch their nukes before they were hit.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/18/asia/cyber-missile-defense-north-korea/index.html

    Of course, that wouldn't give Trump his testosterone hit and ego boost he desires on a daily basis. I can't see him thumping his chest like Kong over a successful cyber attack, whereas explosions and firepower have visceral appeal for him.
     
  5. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #5
    If NK touches SK, all other Asian countries will retaliate, including China.
     
  6. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #6
    Exactly!

    The conundrum is, I think, that this has been exactly the long term goal of North Korea, for decades -- completely annexing South Korea. My guess is, the only way they could accomplish this feat is by getting China on-board; and China will only accept this if they find South Korea a threat.

    And, of course, the only way China could see South Korea as a threat is if they saw South Korea's ally America as a threat.

    And, therefore, the incessant attempt for decades to provoke the US into acting. NK can only achieve their long-term goal if they can goad the US into a pre-emptive strike, but a survivable, limited pre-emptive strike. They need China to get mad enough to kick the US out of the region, without turning NK itself into an irradiated wasteland.

    It's a fine line. ;)
     
  7. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #7
    You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace.
     
  8. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #8
    The peace of the grave, perhaps.
     
  9. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #9
    No. They most certainly will not.

    That is where Trump seems to have a fatal misunderstanding. The US has no allies that share his (Trump's) desire to militarily punish North Korea. And China, of all countries, has no desire to topple the North Korean regime, and less-than-zero interest in legitimizing US military intervention in the Korean peninsula.

    If the US launches military strikes against North Korea, it will find itself totally militarily and politically isolated. This is a fight Donald Trump has chosen to blunder into. And no one outside of him and his deluded supporters thinks this is a good idea.
     
  10. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #10
    I also disagree with this. Why would China help? South Korea is an economic competitor to them, and unlike the US, South Korea is a not a major consumer of Chinese goods. China would benefit from South Korea taking a good bombing - it would send a lot of business their way. China also has nothing to lose if South Korea gets bombed. I think if NK touches SK, we would see some harsh words out of China for optics only, but zero action to stop anything - they would sit back and watch.
     
  11. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #11
    Germany and Japan must have missed that memo.
     
  12. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #12
    Doubtfull, would take away the Kims most powerfull propaganda chip.

    NK's long term goal is to keep 100% control over it's population and everything else is just a tool to achieve it.
     
  13. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #13
    NK is trying to extort the west for money, that is all.
     
  14. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #14
    The bombings went on for years with German war production peaking sometimes in 44 so no noone missed that memo.

    What did end WW2 in europe was Russians in Berlin and Allies sourounding the Ruhr.

    For Japan it was a combination of those 2 bombs and Russia entering the war that made any positive outcome impossible.

    Or just look at Vietnam, more bombs dropped than WW2 on a much smaller area, somewhat different result.
     
  15. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #15
    You would hope so.
     
  16. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #16
    The US hasn't received that memo yet either...
     
  17. yaxomoxay, Aug 11, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    China already declared its neutrality (if NK strikes first). Why? Because they need a stable region. SK is a competitor, but not that much of a competitor. Their competition is on a different games for now. SK will never have China's manpower, and it will never be as cheap. There is really nothing to compete about.
    However, an American war in NK and an unstable SK would destabilize the entire Asian system. China can't allow it;the need for China to keep Kim's family up is going to be zero if NK strikes. And China won't touch one of its greatest commercial customers (the US) just to help Mr Kim.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 11, 2017 ---
    China has no desire to topple Kim, that's true. But they won't tolerate a destabilizing nuclear madman next door taking over another Asian country.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 11, 2017 ---
    It's more complex, as I discussed months ago.
    Kim's family regime always worked on the messianic mission of reunification with SK, all while destroying the evil American empire (and capitalism in general).
    That was a cool threat aimed at keeping its own population (and generals) at bay, until today. Now NK has the weapons to inflict serious damages to other countries. Kim knows very well that he can't refrain from military action if he wants to survive. The internal pressure must be way too strong; no wonder he killed half of his family including his brother in one of the most incredible acts in modern history. Kim is in trouble. Big big trouble.
    NK's only hope is that some general (possibly paid by China) begins a coup to prevent total annihilation. There's going to be blood shed in NK, one way or another. Hopefully it will be a coup.
     
  18. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #18
    I take it you are referring to Donald J. Trump.

    I'm literally not kidding about that. Because that is the way that China would view US military strikes on North Korea. The Chinese, under no circumstances, want to see a unified Korea, militarily allied with the United States, on its southern border.
     
  19. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #19
    It will depend on who strikes first, as China itself mentioned.
    If the US strikes first, china will have to defend NK.
    If NK strikes first... goodbye NK and China will stay on the sidelines.
     
  20. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #20
    Yeah, but what does "strikes first" really mean ? If NK drops some rockets into the ocean just of the coast of Guam and the US reacts by something just a bit tougher we could very see a hot war with both sides able to claim that the other one started it....
     
  21. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #21
    Good question indeed. My guess is that since China is a permanent member of the UN Sec Council, they will use very legalistic ways to determine what constitutes an act of war.
     
  22. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #22
    But North Korea isn't going to attack South Korea.

    They may very well conduct additional missile and nuclear tests. Very likely in violation of a whole slew of international laws and UN resolutions. But that isn't the same as attacking a neighbor. Is it?

    The reality is, countries violate International Law all the time. Even the United States. And if you don't believe me, ask yourself what Guantanamo Bay is all about. Is Russia or the UK justified in launching a military strike on the US because we keep people locked up indefinitely, without access to legal process, for decades at a time?

    The other problem Trump has going for him is this: He has precisely zero credibility. The number of outright lies he tells, on a pretty much daily basis, is such that no one believes a word he says.

    I don't believe what Donald Trump says. Why should Kim Jong-Un?
     
  23. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #23
    I am not so sure. Kim must feel lots of pressure from his own men.
    I think that NK will make the horrible mistake of attacking Guam.
    On the other hand Trump MUST guarantee (and deliver) to China that NK will be a new Hong Kong, an independent protectorate possibly managed by both China and SK somehow.
     
  24. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #24
    I've thought about this myself. Of course the big questions are:
    • Could it be done?
    • Reliably? (I.e., leaving no working weapons?)
    • Or is this idea just a Hollywood- fueled fantasy?
    This is what I'm most afraid of.
     
  25. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #25
    I agree, but what kind of destruction can they do before the retaliation? Seoul is like what, 20-25 miles from the DMZ. He could launch hundreds or thousands of missiles and mortars at them before anyone knew what was happening.
    --- Post Merged, Aug 11, 2017 ---
    Well, most of the left thinks Trump is crazy enough to use nukes, why would Kim be any different?
     

Share This Page