If China cuts off trade and aid to a North Korea, it will encounter several problems.
First will be North Koreans fleeing into China. China would be able to send then back. Second, China's economy will take a hit. That's just not imports, it's the small shopkeepers along the border.
Then what will little Kim do? He'll be desperate. War games during the Cold War showed that when one side faced certain defeat they were prone to use nuclear weapons.
Right now, should he face defeat, Kim has the option to retreat and set up a government in exile. The most likely place is Bejing. If that's not possible, he's stuck.

quote:

Originally posted by wrightd:
Ha !

So answer this question: Why in the hell is there an agreement with NATO/US whatever that SK and Japan can't build weapons to defend themselves ?

It seems like if they can, then it's the SKs and Japan's fault for not being able to defend themselves ! Yes, no ?.

No. Look at India and Pakistan. Do you trust them not to start a kerfuffle that spills over to the rest of use?

Before the Korean War the US policy was to keep South Korea weak. The fear was they'd start a war and head north. Japan was deliberately demilitarized with the US becoming its defender. BTW Japan isn't popular on the Korean Peninsula. It's 50 years of brutal colonization is well remembered.

How many Tomahawks do we have in inventory? Can the B2 deliver a MOAB?

I'm just curious if we have the ability to obliterate NK's southern border defenses and artillery implacements within the first few hours of engagement without going nuclear.

I agree with most here that this is rapidly approaching the point where we have no choice but to use military options. I am curious if we could hit them so hard in the opening few hours that we keep Seoul from being destroyed and minimize the loss of life there.

How long does it take between conflagrations for war to seem obsolete?

quote:

Originally posted by Icabod:
Before the Korean War the US policy was to keep South Korea weak. The fear was they'd start a war and head north.

In retrospect, perhaps it would have been better if they had.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Kook:
How many Tomahawks do we have in inventory? Can the B2 deliver a MOAB?

I'm just curious if we have the ability to obliterate NK's southern border defenses and artillery implacements within the first few hours of engagement without going nuclear.

I agree with most here that this is rapidly approaching the point where we have no choice but to use military options. I am curious if we could hit them so hard in the opening few hours that we keep Seoul from being destroyed and minimize the loss of life there.

With ~15k tubes starting at 122mm upto 400mm rockets and most being "dug in" the onlt way would be cut of C&C and I woumd expect that to be very well protected. Any that had been north of Seoul will tell you the Koreans love to dig....they buod bunkers and tunnels very well.

If they work on the Warsaw pact/Soviet model they are very centealized in their C&C that would be good for us if we could cut it off but I do not believe we could do so....even with a massive strike.

Even if we obliterate 80% of their offensive power 20% (~3000tubes) is enough to rain hell down on anything withing 40km of the DMZ, that is not taking into consideration the likelihood that once the little porker realizes the consequences he will launch his NBC assets.......

Not being a Redleg I cannot recall the amount of pieces in an US armored div but 2nd ID has 7 separate FA BNs with a mixture of M197s and MLRS, figure 50-70 pieces plus the M1 Abrams could fire from fixed positions....so maybe 200+ pieces. So the NORKs would have 10+ divisions worth left....and they know where we are as their spys have been very active in S Korea for the last 60 years.

When I was there (94-95 122n Sig bn camp casey) and was my COs driver I asked what would we do if the ballon went up, his response.."drive south...quickly"

Now I have become much less a hawk in my middle age but truly believe there is no other way to defeat this risk than a massive preemptive strike......but we will lose 10,000+ troops almost immediately and the S Koreans and possibly the Japanese will lose 100 times that.

Our UN Ambassador just said that North Korea is "begging for war." There is no other description. This does not resemble the bluff and bluster of the previous 70 years. This mad little fucker really wants a war that in his demented "divine" mind he probably thinks he will win.

I don't see any good outcomes here other than assassination. And that is a roll of the dice because we don't know who would emerge as the next leader. But at least there would be a chance.

I'm glad Mattis is in charge, and that Trump is president. This is a truly monumental decision, but they will do what needs to be done to protect the USA and the free world.

Pray that there is one sane NORK general with a pistol and the will to save his country from total annihilation.

He is not begging for war, ge is just plating the same trump card that has worked for 25+ years. Porky does nor think we will strike...why would he?

Issue now is we have a CinC that just might call his bluff.

I am curious whether the Chinese actually believe we wilm sit idle....but I expect they do

No one wants a Nuc exchange....and if we attack that is a very real possibility.

Question is, is Trump willing to cause the death of possibly a million plus people to defend tge US homeland?

quote:

Originally posted by dewhorse:
Question is, is Trump willing to cause the death of possibly a million plus people to defend tge US homeland?

Perhaps that's why he was in church yesterday.

quote:

Originally posted by dewhorse:
No one wants a Nuc exchange....

Today the exchange would be 1 sided. In 6 months to a year is anyones guess.

When was the last time we went up against a true lunatic? Even Qdaffy and saddam huesien weren't completely crazy.

quote:

He is not begging for war, ge is just plating the same trump card that has worked for 25+ years.

His father would mass troops, move them toward the border, move missiles around, and make threats. This psycho fired a missile over Japan. He detonated a hydrogen bomb. Does that seem to you like the same old same old?

But it is perplexing because of course there is no need for him to "beg for war." If he really wants it, he could start it at any moment by attacking Seoul.

The real problem is that I don't think we are dealing with a rational person. And, as braillediver says, above, time favors him. In six months or a year, there is no telling what destruction he could bring down not just on Japan, Guam and S. Korea, but on the US mainland.

It's high time that this screwball is dealt with harshly! Every sensible adviser/tactician that I have heard agree that sanctions aren't working. We seem to have a solid coalition. He can't be allowed to gain any more strategic advantage. Time to be rid of this nuisance permanently.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmanic:
It's high time that this screwball is dealt with harshly! Every sensible adviser/tactician that I have heard agree that sanctions aren't working. We seem to have a solid coalition. He can't be allowed to gain any more strategic advantage. Time to be rid of this nuisance permanently.

Sanctions aren't working but it isn't correct to imply that we are using all available sanctions. Far from it.

Sanctions typically start off small and escalate in scope and severity after a period of observation, assuming of course that the sanctions are vetoed at the UN. In the case of the US, we have the monetary muscle to work around the UN and that's why you hear Trump talking about tariffs.

The Chinese economy is geared to the US and if we mess up the flow, they get worried, ad they should.

Consumer costs here go up but we need to make it economically unviable for China to be their lifeline. We are far from having sent that message but we have that ability. Once Kim is gone, who replaces him will be another issue. The Kim dynasty says it will be more of the same which isn't ideal for us but perhaps a modern Vietnam version works for now but there is no way in hell that China will tolerate a US friendly democracy in the region through a unified Korea and no way in hell that it'll be tolerated by Russia either. Kim knows that and he gets great mileage from it but he's a nutjob destabilizing the region for numerous countries with competing interests.

"...
But there are plenty of men who don't care about the law.
Men who'll take part in all kinds of viciousness and don't care who gets hurt.
In fact, the more they get hurt, the better.
When you find yourself in a fight with such viciousness... hit first if you can.
And when you do hit, hit to kill.
You'll know. Don't worry.
You'll know when it comes to that."

-Nicholas Earp

Wyatt Earp Movie 1994

I think it was Bolton who said yesterday the only thing that is going to get Kim's attention is the U.S. pulling all its non military and non essential folks out of S.Korea. At that point he may figure it's not a bluff. Then again, maybe he won't give a shit.

From what I can read, Trump and his folks can totally shut down all trade with NK by anyone trading with the USA. Also, he can lock US $$$ in our banks that belong to anyone that continues to trade with Lil Kim. Money talks, and always has. China does not want to lose trading rights with the USA, and our allies.

The way he's carrying on, maybe he won't be in a position to give a shit.

quote:

Originally posted by GT-40DOC:
From what I can read, Trump and his folks can totally shut down all trade with NK by anyone trading with the USA. Also, he can lock US $$$ in our banks that belong to anyone that continues to trade with Lil Kim. Money talks, and always has. China does not want to lose trading rights with the USA, and our allies.

That assumes that China can control, or at least strongly influence, N.Korea. That has been true. But it is no longer true. Kim's recent actions, especially the H bomb, show that China can't control him.

I wonder where all of these "millions" of casualties numbers are coming from if we should execute a comprehensive pre-emptive strike (whatever the heck that means).

So if we do some type of massive strike on the retalitorial assets that would otherwise be used against SK, what would be the scale of damage to SK ? There's a hell of a lot of difference between thousands and millions. And what could be done to get people out of the target areas for long enough to perform the strike ? I watched a doc on SK, apparently the SK population are passivists, whatever the heck that means. I imagine that might be taken in to the equation, so to speak, but I don't know what that means for us or SK specifically. If the SK's are passifists, then maybe they won't mind of NK invades SK and takes over the whole shebang. If they're willing to accept that instead of war, then maybe they wouldn't want our "help" in taking out NK offensive assets.

quote:

And what could be done to get people out of the target areas for long enough to perform the strike ?

Seoul is a pretty populated place. If we didn't really want to evacuate Houston in the face of Harvey, I'm not sure we'd know what to do with all the folks from Seoul.