What is a realistic worst case scenario of North Korea vs South Korea?

reply to post by SLAYER69



yeah, I meant to say total nuclear war. sorry, my bad

reply to post by badgerprints
2nd on your statement.

I agree, that its too early for China to make a move. They need to 'shadow' the U.S. just a bit longer & thats the only reason why this event imo won't escalate into anything more (knock on wood). Can't really add anything else to your statement, at this moment.

Except worse case scenario would be a unified Korea under Kim Jong Un w/ the backing of China?

I would say realistically it would suck. It would be a big undertaking. The U.S. would probably get involved with fighting NK a little and if not they would definitely lend services such as ships and air crafts, but I'd almost guarantee they would at least do bombing runs for SK. China wouldn't directly fight because they don't want to kill Americans or South Koreans (both are a lot bigger paychecks to china than NK), if they were involved at all they would be funneling weapons into NK on the down low (for a paycheck). Our problem with China would come when it was all said and done because they would undoubtedly scale up their shipping bans they have now and there would be new bans and just problems in general they would probably take advantage of their free pass and make more moves towards getting off the dollar which would hurt us and we couldn't say much as we undoubtedly went against their wishes by getting involved in a NK/SK war.

The post war problems our involvement would cause between us and China could very well lead to a bigger problem, this is really why this is a problem.

There is a chance that NK would do something crazy like try to drop an A bomb though I think it's slight.
Ironically this would end up giving the best overall outcome for us, but obviously awful for SK (unless NK launched one that failed it would still be the ace without the death toll). If they dropped an A bomb, it would be over for them of course, China couldn't support them openly and couldn't condemn the U.S. helping in the war.

Originally posted by markygee

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by markygee

 

Worst Case Scenario is an escalation of Political Posturing possiblly leading to Biological Warfare between North and South . The use of Nuclear Weapons is Highly Unlikely .

What would be the global effect of the use of biological/nuclear weapons? would there be some sort of cancer causing fall out across the USA and western europe or would it fall on japan, china and russia?

An epidemic/plague

A "worst case" scenario is pretty hard to figure. There's "worst case" in terms of what North Korea manages to accomplish in terms of seizing territory, and there's "worst case" in terms of who all ends up involved.

I don't really see China getting too involved. They are a little short in the poot to be making military threats, and they are not quite big enough to economically crush anyone. They don't have enough actual friends in the world, just business partners. They realize this, and know that they are pretty much alone in a military conflict or hostile market action.

So, worst-case is really going to involve the successes of North Korea.

North Korea launches a preemptive strike on major population centers across the border that are within range of their artillery (Seoul, primarily). These incoming rounds would be picked up and tracked by the ballistic radars and counter-battery fire would ensue as the public warning system engaged and civilians began evacuating to various shelters. Civilian casualties are substantial - 10-30%. South Korea launches its strike aircraft to take out predesignated strategic targets of importance.

This is a war North Korea cannot win - their key would be to somehow establish an effective route to push manpower south and manage to keep them supplied. I'm not certain what methods they could employ - but they are not half as dumb as they sometimes act, and we'll presume they make this happen. A two million strong army begins advancing south - they encounter momentary resistance from forces along the border, but they are merely trip-wires. North Korean forces sustain some casualties from both air and artillery fire, but manage to capture and secure Seoul.

By this time, U.S. forces in Pusan and Chinhae are establishing temporary refugee and PoW camps, as well as pulling forces formerly assigned to Seoul into security details to combat North Korean special forces/sleepers. The battle group based out of Japan would be en-route as active and reserve components were called up and prepared to be surged through Pusan.

An absolute 'realistic' worst case is one where we repeat the first Korean war - North Korea pushes all the way down to just outside Pusan with round-the-clock sorties and pure tenacity holding off the advance of North Korea. This would eventually collapse as the present carrier battle group begins striking at the supply lines, or as more carriers arrive in the theater. The final push would come from Pusan - whether Seoul was held to begin with, or not. The rail ways are the life-blood of that nation, as are the ports - and Pusan is the major hub of both.

An 'unrealistic' worst case would be North Korea managing to place one of its nuclear weapons in Pusan's major harbors and fouling them for the duration of the conflict. This could be accomplished with one of their submarines (theoretically) - but it is unlikely neutron emissions would go unnoticed by various satellites placed in orbit for that purpose, and it is doubtful North Korea's nuclear weapons are actually functional. In either case - if North Korea could somehow disable Pusan - it really throws a huge kink into the strategic scenarios and response.

North Korea's navy is pretty much a non-issue. The only thing to be even remotely concerned about are their submarines - and even then, they are only likely to score a kill or two against a destroyer - they couldn't touch an attack sub or carrier. Anything on the surface can be taken out with guided missiles well before it is aware the battle group has arrived.

If China were to get involved, though - I would expect them to make use of their Kilo and Akula class submarines. They would want a slap-in-the-face victory - a cost/effect victory - such as putting a scratch on a carrier (or, God Forbid, sinking one). I highly doubt they would get involved, though. North Korea is as much a liability for them as anything. If North Korea collapses, China has to figure out how to patch them back up - and it's a liability China is likely going to be happy to be rid of, in all honesty. They also know that they can't stand toe-to-toe with a U.S. military response. A single carrier battle group could just about trash the PLAN and get a good ways into relieving China of infrastructure.

Sure - they've got buku people and heavy armor/artillery to throw around the map. It doesn't help them much against our Navy - and there's a reason why the largest superpowers in the world are known for having the best/largest navies. China couldn't stand against our naval power at this time. They need probably another ten to twenty years (or a complete U.S. collapse) to reach a point where their Navy can really have much to say about ours.

In the end - I think China is a non-issue. They will stand over there and toot their horn, but not do much. It's not their style and it's not going to turn out well for them. North Korea, on the other hand, is likely to over-play their hand and end up in a war they didn't bargain for.

Worst case scenario?

"CNN is receiving unconfirmed reports of a nuclear explosion overnight on the Korean peninsula. High ranking Government officials are refusing to confirm or deny these rumors."

If you hear these words on the news, duck and cover.

Originally posted by markygee
what would be a US response if one of their battlegroup was torpedoed and the north denied it was them (again)?

They'd probably flatten a North Korean military facility with a missile strike. However, I don't think the North Koreans would ever get even remotely close enough to do this.

North Korea might be "backed" by China, but I would imagine it is a long long long way from them not realizing the problem that North Korea is.

They are after all neighbours.

You want my best guess? China backs them. China tit-for-tats with the USA about them.

But the minute that China's tech picks up a sign of a nuke about to fly, they flatten North Korea.

No international uproar. China doesn't have to try and accommodate millions of sick and dying.

Just way fewer problems in general - because China would get a terrible international finger wagging. Then everyone would blow a sigh of relief, send in plenty of help to clean up the mess, and the new unified Korea would make for much better neighbours all around.

I put ALL my sheckles on China-Flattens-Lil'Kim's-Empire.

Thanks guys you've all been real helpful and some of the posts appear confident in their theory which makes me feel better.
I personally don't see China jeopordising it's foothold in it's world standing so the possible outcome is crazy kim oversteps his authority and eventually gets destroyed.
Sympathy for the North's civilains.

america going rogue and supporting its past allies the north because of the method of force used by asia against it. including china japan and the south as a frontlines enemy.

Originally posted by markygee
Would someone please take the time to explain to a poorly educated person like me what is the worst case scenario if North Korea backed by China attack a US backed south Korea?

It seems to me that you are already postulating a scenario one jump ahead so it is clear you have partly made up your mind. A fairer question would be starting from the situation as it is now.

Kim Jong-un: He's the key.

The son of Kim Jong-il, the younger Kim could be a trans-formative figure in the unwritten history of North Korea. Assuming he isn't a complete idiot like his father, Jong-un has it within his power to truly be a savior to his people. Poverty-stricken, drought, and famine-ridden, North Korea is the epitome of a failed state; but what if the tentative new leader had a lick of common sense?

On the day of his father's death, when he is firmly in control of the country, what would happen if Kim Jong-un turned his back on the belligerency of the last 60 years and renounced communism? What if he threw open the doors to their nuclear sites, invited inspectors in, and formalized the armistice that suspended hostilities by dismantling the DMZ and allowing separated families to reunite once again? What if he was sincere in his desire to foment peace instead of constantly antagonizing the world? Imagine the possibilities.

I can envision a world held rapt around their televisions, just as it was when the Berlin Wall was torn down. The nations of the world would be beating a path to their door - fighting to give them aid money in the trillions of dollars like fanboys at Comicon competing for the single kiss auctioned off by Stargate Universe's Julia Benson (Check her out: Oh Mama!

) - with South Korea and the US leading the charge.

The gulags would be dismantled, farming would boom, and very quickly hunger in the North would be a thing of the past. Once again a part of the community of nations instead of a pariah state, reunification of the two Koreas would spark a new era of cooperation between brethren and within a few years new industries would be popping up all over, and following the South Korean model the northern part of the country would become an economic powerhouse.

Peace and prosperity would reign throughout the peninsula and Kim Jong-un would go down in the annals of Korean history as the man who singlehandedly saved the formerly communist country from utter ruin. Statues would be commissioned, holidays established, and for once a Kim would deserve the accolades - If he had any common sense.

Anybody holding their breath?

I don't know about worst case scenario, but we can try to formulate our own if you'd like, I'll include this map if anyone wants to fill it in
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bedfaa2b5cba.jpg[/atsimg]



4 relevent points of interest marked, the 2 capitals, norths nuclear facility & where hostilities have occurred recently

reply to post by markygee


First of all i don’t think there is going to be any war.

Worst case, absolute worst possibly think that could happen but also so unlikely that its negligible.

A North Korean military commander goes rouge, acquires a nuclear device, smuggles it through the DMZ and detonates it on or near a large American base. America retaliates with a nuclear strike against North Korea.

That really is as bad as i think it could get but it’s so unlikely that I wouldn’t really even conceder it a possibility.

worst thing that could happen?
the koreans throw out the bumbs using them as proxies and supplying them both with nuclear weaponry
(rummy sold to NK , last week the US were fixing to put some in SK)
god the sheeple are sooooostupid
and the Korea(s) can get back together and the people can get back to being the families they used to be
before they were Balkanized


then the US and China can go Bugger some other little countryside somewhere
like north and south dakota

guess I should back up my opinion with some facts
PS no offence to the Dakotas
(hey Bottineau county, ! )

Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build nuclear weapons

www.guardian.co.uk...

South Korea considers return of US tactical nuclear weapons

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by Danbones

guess I should back up my opinion with some facts

From your sources:

The reactor deal was part of President Bill Clinton's policy of persuading the North Korean regime to positively engage with the west.

In a statement to the American magazine Newsweek, his spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said that there "was no vote on this". A spokesman for ABB told the Guardian yesterday that "board members were informed about the project which would deliver systems and equipment for light water reactors".

Holding a vote and being informed are two different things. Rumsfeld was not in the political scene at the time, and had no reason to start public outcry over the issue. Any memos and internal communications/debates/discussions are simply not ours to read.

I can tell you of some pretty heated discussions taking place in church committee meetings - arguments that barely kick up rumors within the congregation, let alone make it to even the smallest of local media outlets.

the koreans throw out the bumbs using them as proxies and supplying them both with nuclear weaponry

South Korea is one of the closest allies the U.S. has. Period. Korea is one of the world's ten largest economies because they have been left free to govern themselves and seek their own markets.

god the sheeple are sooooostupid

Perhaps if you could spell or use sensible sentence structure, I would be more offended.

and the Korea(s) can get back together and the people can get back to being the families they used to be

This is simply never going to happen. The wealth ratio between South and North Korea is 10:1 - it was only about 2:1 for East/West Germany. Korea will never again become a unified nation - it would be an economic disaster for South Korea, who would end up having to subsidize all of North Korea's development.

The best the two countries can hope for is an open border policy and a signed end to the conflict with incremental disarming of the border. That is, indeed, what recent generations have been attempting to accomplish, and has been supported by American and other national interests for some time. North Korea is not interested (the leadership, that is).

Many of the college and somewhat older generations have come to realize there is not going to be an opening of the gates and a sappy tearful reunion. The North has become too corrupted by their governmental system to make that a reality at present or in the foreseeable future.

I think the worst case scenario is launching nuclear missle to South Korea and then provoke third world war between North Korea ally and South Korea ally. Or maybe certain interest group may use North Korea as a scapegoat and provoke false flag nuclear attack. Now whatever happens people will believe North Korea did it.

Originally posted by markygee
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

er...no im not registered I dont think they have this in the UK. Surely north korean manufacturing quality means that most weapons will malfunction or not fully operate within expected parameters? (fingers crossed - i'm imagining guns not firing and ICBM's falling into the sea...)

What makes you think NK manufactures its own wepons. The missles used on SK seemed to work just fine.
You think a little poor country in the middle of nowhere that has been sanctioned by the USA for years has done all this by itself..
kx

real time line nov 28th 2010 the USS GW was lost at see.... all hands feared dead... no word as to the cause... Sole South Korea... 100,000 NKR seen massing along border...China warns US and UN... do not take action...US, no way could the sinking of GW be an accident, too soon to tell. KJU take's over as head of the RNK... US the USS GW was sunk by missile... survivor tells story... Missile destroys sole, thought to be NUKE!!!! Confirmed!!!!NUKE used in war... WAR declared... South Kora surrenders, China makes move against Taiwan, US in peace talks, tells NK and China we seek peace...50,000 NKR cross 38th parallel...US all US troops to pull out of SK, tells Taiwan your on your own. that is what most of you would like to see. i do see us the US in for a fight, Nukes will be used, the tactical ones, GW get's hit, we get bloody nose China sees op too make move on Taiwan, sole SK falls this all happens before the 6thdec 2010. just a gut felling.