Pentagon Estimates 250,000 US Dead In A North Korean War

Since this forum is so gung-ho about a possible USA versus North Korea war, we should actually talk about reality here, and not the fantasies and delusions that abound in all the discussions. You know, the "let's turn them Chinese and Koreans into glass" geniuses that dominate all these discussions.

Let's talk about reality. Like how the Pentagon's own simulations and estimates show 250,000 US dead if another full scale war between North Korea and the USA takes place on the Korean peninsula.

The reality of what this would mean is far different from the delusions that are being talked about here in these forums (like, "USA will destroy them Koreans in an hour").

That is unacceptable, we need more like forty million dead. That will bring down the unemployment rate better and help the economy out.

Just kidding....I think

reply to post by Red Cloak


How about a link?
Are these estimates if the military is allowed to conduct a war how they see fit, or with them hampered by political repercussions with one hand tied behind their back?

Where is your source? I would like to read for myself any estimations like you state. It sounds unrealistic to me, no offense.

reply to post by Red Cloak


source please, i would like to see the pentagons report.
or is this just some number somebody has thrown out.

US dead?... nah!

The US would do nothing but sit in its boats lobbing missiles and sending jets.. the South Koreans, now they will be the ones to fight and die in the apparent war.

what are the details.. how would this happen?

It's my opinion that number is low - unless the US decides to 'nukes' 'them'.

Anything action that requires 'hand to hand' combat? 250k? Low.

Makes me wonder if people have any idea the numbers and capability of the military of Korea North.

peace

reply to post by Red Cloak


I'd like to know what kind of battle plan that is based on. Any US commander who thinks to put boots on the ground in NK is an idiot who should be stripped of his stars. That is hardly needed to achieve the objective, i.e. regime change. We'd only see casualties like that if we marched right in, which would be rather stupid, given the other tactics available to us.

The only other reports I'm finding that quote that number tracks back to an article by writer Eric Margolis. Would be nice to know what reports he's referring to.

And he sights that number for a ground invasion, last paragraph of his article.

The Pentagon estimated a full-scale invasion of North Korea could cost 250,000 American casualties. In short, a real war, not the jolly little police actions launched by the US in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia.

Full article here.

reply to post by Red Cloak

I have to agree with you on this one. I don't think many people actually grasp the realities of war - especially one with North Korea. Besides the great loss of life on both sides, consider the economic consequences. What about a full scale cyber attack? I think an all out war would be felt on the US mainland and not necessarily with a physical missile attack.

For those who think the US will runover North Korea... remember we are only a few weeks away until the 10th aniversary of this great moment...


If it takes over 10 years to 'win' a war against Iraq and the Taliban - how do you expect to 'crush' one of the largest militaries in the world? They may not have the most advanced weaponry but they are better equipped that IEDs and suicide bombers.

While such numbers are of course shocking and sad, another LIKELY scenario is that 100,000s of people might die, while fatso will end up in exile somewhere living happily.

It's always the brainwashed/innocent etc. who die for the insanity of their leaders.

There was this good example featured a few weeks ago of the two former WWII soldiers, one a German and the other a Brit, who, after decades, became friends spending their time together fishing in Canada.....after they were enemies due to the insane ideology of one single person, Hitler.

Point being, in a few decades the entire NK regime might be gone/forgotten, with fatso either in exile or dead rotting somewhere, doesn't matter, and thousands having lost their life...literally for nothing or for an ideology which was only in the interest of a few (more often than not) mentally insane.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
US dead?... nah!

The US would do nothing but sit in its boats lobbing missiles and sending jets.. the South Koreans, now they will be the ones to fight and die in the apparent war.

What about the over 100,000 US citizens living in South Korea? The 28,000 US military in South Korea? Just because they are not currently on US soil doesn't make them any less American... does it?

Casualty estimates are often grossly overestimated by the war planners.

That way, when the war is over, they can say... 'We only lost a tenth of the number of men that we anticipated, look how well we did'.

Hmmm...
I dunno Bro, maybe if we started bussing Americans to N.Korea, unarmed and possibly frail then there might be a number that high.
You do realize that N.Korea is just above stone age with nothing really going for them other than "possible" allies?
Looks like more propaganda to make us fear "the reds"!!
Now that we are quickly running out of brown men...err...people to kill.

reply to post by fenceSitter

For those who think the US will runover North Korea... remember we are only a few weeks away until the 10th aniversary of this great moment...

People just LOVE to belabor this point. They keep forgetting that the WAR part (toppling the leadership regime) took only about two weeks. It was the POLICE actions later, that took time and lives. In NK, it might take three weeks to take out Un and leaders, due to bunkers...but yeah, if we then get stuck trying to POLICE there, then we see more casualties.

reply to post by Gazrok

I think an argument can still be made whether you are currently policing the country or still in a state of war. Considering there is still ongoing battle with the Taliban an al Qaeda I think a war still exists. Just because you take the head of your opponent doesn't always mean the war is won. North Korea won't be much different. You can take out Un and his senior military but in reality you have a country of 10 million people that have been fed anti-US propaganda for decades. I believe a lot of them will still be fighting long after Un is gone.

reply to post by Red Cloak

Let's talk about reality. Like how the Pentagon's own simulations and estimates show 250,000 US dead if another full scale war between North Korea and the USA takes place on the Korean peninsula.

FINALLY~ A threader who is not playing a game of Axis&Allies~ Thank you. SnF just for that.

Now those numbers sound like a WAR to me. I'd like to get my hands on that simulation program the pentagon is using btw~ I hope it's not based off the Sid Meyer's Civ V game

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by Red Cloak

 

I'd like to know what kind of battle plan that is based on. Any US commander who thinks to put boots on the ground in NK is an idiot who should be stripped of his stars. That is hardly needed to achieve the objective, i.e. regime change. We'd only see casualties like that if we marched right in, which would be rather stupid, given the other tactics available to us.

Regime change will do nothing. Most of the people alive in NK today have been raised to hate the west. The war wont end when the regime does. Im sure NK understands this. Killing Un might even drive the NK military and people to fight harder.