terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
WHAT KIND OF A STUPID QUESTION IS THAT?
North Korea Defence Forum
- Thread starter CCP
- Start date
yantong1980
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2016
- Messages
- 491
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Are you drunk? With Fat Kim goes mad and nuke flying and explode around this region, who the h*** care about rescuing him?
samsara
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2016
- Messages
- 2,793
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
North Korea’s Ballistic Missiles Are Very Hard to Hit
The history of Scud hunts is not encouraging
By Robert Beckhusen - War Is Boring - April 6, 2017
Both of these following statements are true.
(1) Attempts to encourage North Korea to abandon its nuclear program through diplomacy have failed and, chances are, will continue to fail. (2) Were the United States to strike North Korea, the reclusive regime has ways to retaliating which America and its allies cannot easily counter.
The U.S. military is most worried about a North Korean nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, with the range to reach the U.S. homeland. If North Korea has not achieved this technical feat already by miniaturizing and “mating” a warhead to a reliable missile, then it’s quite possible it will do so by the end of the decade.
“There is a real possibility that North Korea will be able to hit the U.S. with a nuclear-armed missile by the end of the first Trump term,” deputy White House national security advisor K.T. McFarland told the Financial Times.
McFarland noted that a U.S. strike targeting “launch facilities, underground nuclear sites, artillery and rocket response forces and regime leadership targets may be the only option left on the table.”
McFarland did not explicitly say the White House is treating a strike as the only option. But the White House is right to be skeptical that diplomacy with North Korea, an ultra-nationalist regime which maintains power through a “military-first” ideology, will encourage Pyongyang to moderate or abandon its goals.
But striking North Korea’s rocket response forces — which could rain ballistic missiles onto South Korea — is a tactic with a poor track record.
North Korea is mountainous, and missile launchers are not difficult to camouflage and hide from aerial spotters, who often must rely on grainy imagery to see below. North Korea has also studied previous U.S. ballistic missile hunts and improved its own tactics.
During the 1991 Persian Gulf War, U.S. and British commandos operating in small teams scoured western Iraq — with coalition warplanes flying above — for Saddam Hussein’s Scud arsenal. While U.S. officials at the time described the hunt as highly effective, post-war Pentagon research found that few if any ballistic missile launchers were successfully destroyed.
While Iraqi Scud launches did decline during the war, they in fact increased during its final week.
North Korea has a considerably larger missile stockpile than Saddam did in 1991. The Iraqi dictator fired at least 81 Scuds during the war, aimed roughly in half at Israel and Saudi Arabia, and caused relatively few casualties — although one strike on a U.S. barracks killed 28 soldiers and injured another 110.
“The Iraqis’ use of decoys and other deception techniques, the quickfire ‘shoot and scoot’ capabilities of the Scud crews, and sensor and other technical shortfalls, plus the vast amount of terrain special operations personnel were expected to cover, combined to frustrate and undermine the coalition’s Scud-hunting mission,” the RAND Corporation, a think-tank closely associated with the U.S. Air Force, noted in a 2001 study.
North Korea probably has around 1,000 ballistic missiles of various types — most of them close copies of missiles obtained from its allies. Most of these missiles are also relatively shorter range weapons, although they are capable of reaching anywhere in South Korea.
The regime has also improved on its Scud arsenal. Around 600 of these missiles are in the Scud B, C and D categories, and 300 more are Nodongs–an upgraded Scud capable with a high firing arc, making it harder to intercept, and capable of delivering a 1,000-kilogram high-explosive warhead as far as Japan.
The DPRK’s longer-range Musudan Taepodong missiles number in the several dozen and can reach well into the Pacific — and would be priority targets in a U.S. aerial onslaught.
What’s less certain is whether North Korean missile crews are adequately trained for war. It’s possible most crews — given the size of the force relative to the number of missile tests — likely have limited experience. Accuracy and reliability of missiles throughout the force will vary, but it’s reasonable to believe that North Korea has hundreds of serviceable missiles which it can use in the event of a war.
North Korea hasn’t stood still, either. The regime crunches data and has (unevenly) applied lessons from foreign wars through a series of military-controlled research institutes. North Korea has long-standing influence into Yemen, where Houthi fighters with ballistic missiles — some likely either supplied by North Korea in years past or modified with North Korean assistance — have continued to fire into Saudi Arabia despite a two-year-long air campaign.
Desert Storm also made an impression on North Korea’s generals. The coalition’s ineffective Scud hunt apparently confirmed to the DPRK that its own missile forces would be hard-pressed to hit. It’s unclear whether North Korea changed its tactics after the conflict, and it’s possible confirmation bias prevailed and inhibited change, according to a 2010 study at the KPA Journal, which researches the DPRK’s military.
North Korea has, however, embraced camouflage and deception especially regarding its missile forces. KPA Journal noted that a Korean military manual smuggled out of the country in 2010 directly cited Serbian concealment tactics in 1999 as worth copying. In 2004, the regime declared a “Year of Camouflage,” hinting at the priority.
Which poses a real problem for U.S. and allied war planners. An invasion of North Korea would likely stop the regime’s missiles for good — but that would entail a horrendous war. Were the United States to launch an air campaign on the scale of Desert Storm, the odds are good that most of Kim Jong Un’s missiles will survive.
Making nice with North Korea, or encouraging China to pressure the regime, probably won’t stop Kim from building nukes and improving his ballistic missiles, either.
It’s a serious of options — all bad.
The history of Scud hunts is not encouraging
By Robert Beckhusen - War Is Boring - April 6, 2017
Both of these following statements are true.
(1) Attempts to encourage North Korea to abandon its nuclear program through diplomacy have failed and, chances are, will continue to fail. (2) Were the United States to strike North Korea, the reclusive regime has ways to retaliating which America and its allies cannot easily counter.
The U.S. military is most worried about a North Korean nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, with the range to reach the U.S. homeland. If North Korea has not achieved this technical feat already by miniaturizing and “mating” a warhead to a reliable missile, then it’s quite possible it will do so by the end of the decade.
“There is a real possibility that North Korea will be able to hit the U.S. with a nuclear-armed missile by the end of the first Trump term,” deputy White House national security advisor K.T. McFarland told the Financial Times.
McFarland noted that a U.S. strike targeting “launch facilities, underground nuclear sites, artillery and rocket response forces and regime leadership targets may be the only option left on the table.”
McFarland did not explicitly say the White House is treating a strike as the only option. But the White House is right to be skeptical that diplomacy with North Korea, an ultra-nationalist regime which maintains power through a “military-first” ideology, will encourage Pyongyang to moderate or abandon its goals.
But striking North Korea’s rocket response forces — which could rain ballistic missiles onto South Korea — is a tactic with a poor track record.
North Korea is mountainous, and missile launchers are not difficult to camouflage and hide from aerial spotters, who often must rely on grainy imagery to see below. North Korea has also studied previous U.S. ballistic missile hunts and improved its own tactics.
During the 1991 Persian Gulf War, U.S. and British commandos operating in small teams scoured western Iraq — with coalition warplanes flying above — for Saddam Hussein’s Scud arsenal. While U.S. officials at the time described the hunt as highly effective, post-war Pentagon research found that few if any ballistic missile launchers were successfully destroyed.
While Iraqi Scud launches did decline during the war, they in fact increased during its final week.
North Korea has a considerably larger missile stockpile than Saddam did in 1991. The Iraqi dictator fired at least 81 Scuds during the war, aimed roughly in half at Israel and Saudi Arabia, and caused relatively few casualties — although one strike on a U.S. barracks killed 28 soldiers and injured another 110.
“The Iraqis’ use of decoys and other deception techniques, the quickfire ‘shoot and scoot’ capabilities of the Scud crews, and sensor and other technical shortfalls, plus the vast amount of terrain special operations personnel were expected to cover, combined to frustrate and undermine the coalition’s Scud-hunting mission,” the RAND Corporation, a think-tank closely associated with the U.S. Air Force, noted in a 2001 study.
North Korea probably has around 1,000 ballistic missiles of various types — most of them close copies of missiles obtained from its allies. Most of these missiles are also relatively shorter range weapons, although they are capable of reaching anywhere in South Korea.
The regime has also improved on its Scud arsenal. Around 600 of these missiles are in the Scud B, C and D categories, and 300 more are Nodongs–an upgraded Scud capable with a high firing arc, making it harder to intercept, and capable of delivering a 1,000-kilogram high-explosive warhead as far as Japan.
The DPRK’s longer-range Musudan Taepodong missiles number in the several dozen and can reach well into the Pacific — and would be priority targets in a U.S. aerial onslaught.
What’s less certain is whether North Korean missile crews are adequately trained for war. It’s possible most crews — given the size of the force relative to the number of missile tests — likely have limited experience. Accuracy and reliability of missiles throughout the force will vary, but it’s reasonable to believe that North Korea has hundreds of serviceable missiles which it can use in the event of a war.
North Korea hasn’t stood still, either. The regime crunches data and has (unevenly) applied lessons from foreign wars through a series of military-controlled research institutes. North Korea has long-standing influence into Yemen, where Houthi fighters with ballistic missiles — some likely either supplied by North Korea in years past or modified with North Korean assistance — have continued to fire into Saudi Arabia despite a two-year-long air campaign.
Desert Storm also made an impression on North Korea’s generals. The coalition’s ineffective Scud hunt apparently confirmed to the DPRK that its own missile forces would be hard-pressed to hit. It’s unclear whether North Korea changed its tactics after the conflict, and it’s possible confirmation bias prevailed and inhibited change, according to a 2010 study at the KPA Journal, which researches the DPRK’s military.
North Korea has, however, embraced camouflage and deception especially regarding its missile forces. KPA Journal noted that a Korean military manual smuggled out of the country in 2010 directly cited Serbian concealment tactics in 1999 as worth copying. In 2004, the regime declared a “Year of Camouflage,” hinting at the priority.
Which poses a real problem for U.S. and allied war planners. An invasion of North Korea would likely stop the regime’s missiles for good — but that would entail a horrendous war. Were the United States to launch an air campaign on the scale of Desert Storm, the odds are good that most of Kim Jong Un’s missiles will survive.
Making nice with North Korea, or encouraging China to pressure the regime, probably won’t stop Kim from building nukes and improving his ballistic missiles, either.
It’s a serious of options — all bad.
Brainsucker
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 2,679
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
But don't forget that China and N.Korea have mutual defense pact. This pact will expire in 2020. So if Trump insist to attack N.Korea before the pact is expire in 2020, then China must answer the call to arm to defend the North Korea. Or nobody will believe in them anymore.
lcloo
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3,981
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
If Korea War 2.0 happens China will definitely get involved, they will do it not because of Fat Kim, that kid is irrelevant but because of China's own national security. North Korea is a very important buffer zone between China and US military presence.
What China concerns most is that if North Korea is occupied by US, China's security will be compromised by close proximity of US presence near China's border and startegic cities and industrial centres in North East China.
If US put their radar stations and missile facilities in occupied North Korea, China's defence against US's first strike pre-emptive nuclear attacks will be far less effective, putting China in a very disadvantage position. It is like what happen to USA when Soviet put their missiles and radars in Cuba in 1960s.
China's involvement in Korea War 1.0 was due to Americans ignoring several Chinese warnings not to push towards the Yalu river which is the border between China and North Korea.
What China concerns most is that if North Korea is occupied by US, China's security will be compromised by close proximity of US presence near China's border and startegic cities and industrial centres in North East China.
If US put their radar stations and missile facilities in occupied North Korea, China's defence against US's first strike pre-emptive nuclear attacks will be far less effective, putting China in a very disadvantage position. It is like what happen to USA when Soviet put their missiles and radars in Cuba in 1960s.
China's involvement in Korea War 1.0 was due to Americans ignoring several Chinese warnings not to push towards the Yalu river which is the border between China and North Korea.
Last edited:
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
That's the obvious reasons, and people still don't get it
samsara
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2016
- Messages
- 2,793
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Some posters are so obsessed with the Fat Kim that they do forget the geostrategic importance of the North Korea in the Northeast Asia 
Kim is just one personality, he is not the essence, and may go at any time.
Nope, China will NEVER let the North Korea fall and be occupied by the American forces... for many of obvious reasons... but one of them is the Chinese cannot betray the blood shed by the many of their compatriots in the 1950s. Such betrayal from accepting any change pushed forward by external violence more over a hostile force is totally unacceptable! The very special connection between the two is paved by abundant bloodshed and many sacrificed lives...<sighed> Yalu River is the quiet, eternal witness
Kim is just one personality, he is not the essence, and may go at any time.Nope, China will NEVER let the North Korea fall and be occupied by the American forces... for many of obvious reasons... but one of them is the Chinese cannot betray the blood shed by the many of their compatriots in the 1950s. Such betrayal from accepting any change pushed forward by external violence more over a hostile force is totally unacceptable! The very special connection between the two is paved by abundant bloodshed and many sacrificed lives...<sighed> Yalu River is the quiet, eternal witness
cnleio
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2012
- Messages
- 10,563
- Reaction score
- 19
- Country
- Location
I don't know how the U.S 'solve' North Korea, what U.S.A need 'solve' is these North Korean armed with China & Russia weapons and continuously logistics support from China to the Korean Peninsula. Although Pyongyang now not trust BeiJing, but in War North Korea only rely on China and 'Made in China' weapons.
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
An attack on DPRK equals declaring war to China. I don't think the message can get more clearer than that.
52051
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,245
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
To be fair, NK is the place where Trump could make a breakingthrough and get some much needed brownie point for his rather awkward presidency.
China's leadership got tired at supporting this crappy fat kid lily Kim, and China dont have much will to protect him against some US military operation, if such operation only involve remove lily kim through some air strike but not annex north korea.
China's leadership got tired at supporting this crappy fat kid lily Kim, and China dont have much will to protect him against some US military operation, if such operation only involve remove lily kim through some air strike but not annex north korea.
Jlaw
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9,693
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
Seem like some real or fake Chinese posters don't get it as they make fun if Kim, etc. Even saying to stop supporting NK. Some of these Chinese need to learn geography and history. Seem like going to the west for "higher" learning made them less intelligent.
TaiShang
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2014
- Messages
- 27,848
- Reaction score
- 70
- Country
- Location
What we need a North Korea-US mutual destruction parity, not the singular destruction of North Korea to ensure safety for USers.
Their safety is our latest, if any, concern.
Our concern is our own security and interests. So, stop short of calling the leadership of North Korea names. You may dislike the personality and question legitimacy, but, by mocking, you are serving to the US interests and harming your own interests.
Only balance of power in the Korean Peninsula will ensure stability. Under countless US threats and pressure, DPRK is left with no other choice but seeking the ultimate balancer.
History has enough examples of giving up on one's nuclear deterrence based on US regime assurance: Iraq and Libya.
Their safety is our latest, if any, concern.
Our concern is our own security and interests. So, stop short of calling the leadership of North Korea names. You may dislike the personality and question legitimacy, but, by mocking, you are serving to the US interests and harming your own interests.
Only balance of power in the Korean Peninsula will ensure stability. Under countless US threats and pressure, DPRK is left with no other choice but seeking the ultimate balancer.
History has enough examples of giving up on one's nuclear deterrence based on US regime assurance: Iraq and Libya.
samsara
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2016
- Messages
- 2,793
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Under the constant threats of the USA-KOR military drills and their war scenarios to take over Pyongyang, the North Korea is left out with no choice other than going nuke! In no way the North Korea is able to or can afford the conventional arm race against the US forces in KOR.
Just see why the USA never gives any positive response to China's proposal: US-KOR stop their military drills in return for the PRK to halt its nuke program!
And it's the very intention of the USA to steadily instigate the rogue responses from the North Korea in order to maintain the high tension there as a strong justification (or pretext) to pile up its military forces in the Korean Peninsula encircling China. To encircle China and put it under check is the TRUE objective of all these deliberately created high tensions in that peninsula!
DO NOT be distracted by the rest of Kabuki shows there
Basel
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2013
- Messages
- 9,504
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
It will be interesting if Trump go with out China against NK and send in barrage of Tomahawk CM and B-2 with massive firepower to take out NK nuclear capability.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
