Time to build the bomb shelter? WW3 discussion thread

[Thorgalaeg]

I also don't see North Korea achieving a breakthrough of South Korea's defenses in a matter of hours, nor do I see what you are basing such an assumption on. I think you are putting too much stock in North Korea's numbers (which really aren't that much larger than South Korea's by the way), and not factoring in all the force multipliers that South Korea and the US have at their disposal. With the US launching constant disruption operations behind the front lines, North Korea wouldn't be able to focus their air defense at the front, so while South Korean troops hold them back from carefully prepared fortified positions, North Korean ground troops would be getting constantly harassed by US, South Korean, and possibly Japanese aircraft. That would make it very difficult for North Korea to break through quickly and the fighting would almost certainly devolve into a WWI-style war of attrition as North Korean forces would be forced to dig in to protect themselves from the constant airstrikes.

It would also be very stupid for North Korea to focus their artillery strikes on Seoul, as those guns are certainly going to be needed to help break South Korean fortifications at the front. Firing at Seoul instead of fortifications would leave those tank divisions of theirs totally exposed and without fire support, which would be a death sentence for them. Plus, we have these really cool counter-battery systems installed on our artillery now, so every time one of their guns fires, one of ours will fire right back at it and destroy it.

North Korea knows it cant win such a war and all his strategy is based on taking Seoul as hostage. It will probably put all his weight in taking the city in the first hours not matter the price. And last time i checked NK surpassed SK in infantry and number of tanks amply.

Dont say it will break through ROK defenses but there is many chances it will do, or at least will try by all means, and in such case nukes would be the only way of saving Seoul.

 

[Commodore]

North Korea knows it cant win such a war and all his strategy is based on taking Seoul as hostage.

That may be his strategy, but it simply will not work. Kim Jong-Un simply does not have the military capability to quickly defeat a very powerful South Korean military that is backed up by an even more powerful US and possibly Japan as well.

And last time i checked NK surpassed SK in infantry and number of tanks amply.

Here are numbers from the Global Firepower Index:

South Korea:

Active frontline personnel: 625,000
Tanks: 2,381
Armored Fighting Vehicles: 2,660
Self-Propelled Guns: 1,990
Towed Artillery: 5,374
Multiple-Launch Rocket Systems: 214

Global Firepower Ranking: 11 out of 126

North Korea:

Active Frontline Personnel: 700,000
Tanks: 4,200
Armored Fighting Vehicles: 4,100
Self-Propelled Guns: 2,250
Towed-Artillery: 4,300
Multiple-Launch Rocket Systems: 2,400

Global Firepower Ranking: 25 out of 126

However, while North Korea out numbers South Korea in almost every category, it's not by enough to overcome the technological advantages South Korea has over North Korea. Once you factor all that in, South Korea has more than enough personnel and fighting vehicles to hold back any North Korean assault.

Again, you are putting too much emphasis on numbers and not considering quality. North Korea has a lot of soldiers and equipment, but their soldiers are poorly trained and equipped, and their fighting vehicles are horribly antiquated. Hell, most of those 4,200 tanks they have are old T-55s that have not undergone any of the modernization that other nations that still use the T-55 have done. Those will not fair very well against the very modern South Korean K2.

You also have to factor in the 28,500 US soldiers that will be backing up South Korean defenses, and the additional forces that will be deployed to launch a counter-invasion of North Korea which will prevent them from focusing the kind of force they would need in order to break through to Seoul.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Didnt say it would be easy, in any case it is not impossible at all. And btw most NK tanks are not T-55 but more modern models. T-55s would probably not even take part in the initial assault. And don't know why you assume NK troops are poorly trained. In fact the whole country is trained with ten years of compulsory service.

OTOH there is also the possibility of NK being the first one in using nukes to make a breach through ROK's impenetrable defenses...

 

[Commodore]

Didnt say it would be easy, in any case it is not impossible at all.

A breakthrough is not impossible, but that's not what you claimed. You claimed North Korea would be able to break through South Korean lines and take Seoul in a matter of hours. That's the part that's impossible. They simply don't have the numbers or the capability to achieve such a rapid victory.

So yeah, you did kinda claim it would be easy for North Korea to take Seoul.

And btw most NK tanks are not T-55 but more modern models.

Yes, they are. North Korea possesses around 1,600 T-55s in their arsenal and another 175 Type 59s which is just the Chinese version of the T-55. That's 42% of their tank force. The second largest chunk of their tank force is comprised of roughly 1,800 T-62s or the domestically produced Ch'onma-ho, which is just the North Korean version of the T-62. T-62s are getting to the point where they are just about as ineffective and antiquated as the T-55s and those comprise another 42% of their tank force.

The most modern tank model the North Koreans have is the T-72 (or their domestic copy of it), and they only have 500 of those. Seeing as we were able to absolutely shred T-72s with ease back in 1990, I'd say 500 T-72s isn't going to be enough to break through South Korean defenses in a matter of hours.

And don't know why you assume NK troops are poorly trained. In fact the whole country is trained with ten years of compulsory service

It's not an assumption, it's a fact. I was an intelligence collector when I was in the Army and had friends in the intelligence community that were stationed in South Korea. All of the information they were able to get on North Korea indicates their training is nowhere near as good as South Korea's or ours. Their problem is they focus too much on making their soldiers physically tough, and do not teach them anything more than the most basic battlefield tactics. They also don't encourage their soldiers, NCOs, or officers to improvise on the battlefield which means they aren't as flexible or as able to handle rapidly changing battlefield conditions as South Koreans can.

 

[Kyriakos]

I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Seoul is nuked. So South Korea does stand to lose hugely, regardless of the overall outcome of the war.
And, even if not nuked, it is not as if any anti-missile defense will down thousands of missiles fired, so Seoul will be devastated regardless. Though a nuclear hit will have longer-term consequences.

 

[Akka]

I disagree with this. The countries with nuclear arsenals have a vast array of things to disagree over, but at the end of the day they are all in complete agreement that no one else should join them. Not out of any sense of justice or fairness. Completely the opposite, actually. If the chips come down and the US uses a missile strike similar to what was used in Syria to take out the immanent nuclear threat that NK keeps boasting that they have the rest of the nuclear club will breath a happy sigh and go about their business.

If that were the case, India and Pakistan would have been quite a lot more browbeaten, which didn't happen.

The real reason why China won't support NK to the end is simply that NK is a PITA for everyone, including China. Their reason to support NK was ideological a long time ago, but now it's just to prevent having a US ally on their border. In fact they made a show to not support current leadership these time (like the absence of any chinese official in the recent "founder anniversary").

 

[Akka]

Errr... It was more like several weeks IIRC... And even then there were plenty of iraqi tanks around which were not reduced to scrap.

And a "tactical nuke" (cant imagine why you use "" here) can destroy a whole division in seconds. Dont see your point here.

It was a few weeks of staring at each other with menacing eyes, and barely a few days of rolling through Iraqi units with a deathcount so low there were more case of friendly fire than killings from the enemy.
And yeah a nuke can do the destructive job more quickly, but it comes with too much baggage when you can do the same with conventional means - and not even that many efforts.

NK is a paper tiger, for all their posturing they are completely outclassed by SK alone.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

A breakthrough is not impossible, but that's not what you claimed. You claimed North Korea would be able to break through South Korean lines and take Seoul in a matter of hours. That's the part that's impossible. They simply don't have the numbers or the capability to achieve such a rapid victory.

So yeah, you did kinda claim it would be easy for North Korea to take Seoul.

Nope i didnt claim it would be easy, i claimed it was possible and i claimed it would be quick If happens. In fact they would be in Seoul in a matter of hours. It is only 40 km away from the frontier.

Yes, they are. North Korea possesses around 1,600 T-55s in their arsenal and another 175 Type 59s which is just the Chinese version of the T-55. That's 42% of their tank force. The second largest chunk of their tank force is comprised of roughly 1,800 T-62s or the domestically produced Ch'onma-ho, which is just the North Korean version of the T-62. T-62s are getting to the point where they are just about as ineffective and antiquated as the T-55s and those comprise another 42% of their tank force.

The most modern tank model the North Koreans have is the T-72 (or their domestic copy of it), and they only have 500 of those. Seeing as we were able to absolutely shred T-72s with ease back in 1990, I'd say 500 T-72s isn't going to be enough to break through South Korean defenses in a matter of hours.

Lets see, you claimed most NK tanks were t-55. They arent. 42% is not "most" in this planet. 58% is.

It's not an assumption, it's a fact. I was an intelligence collector when I was in the Army and had friends in the intelligence community that were stationed in South Korea. All of the information they were able to get on North Korea indicates their training is nowhere near as good as South Korea's or ours. Their problem is they focus too much on making their soldiers physically tough, and do not teach them anything more than the most basic battlefield tactics. They also don't encourage their soldiers, NCOs, or officers to improvise on the battlefield which means they aren't as flexible or as able to handle rapidly changing battlefield conditions as South Koreans can.

Well, we will have yo take your words as facts then. OK.

 

[Kyriakos]

@Akka ^Don't underestimate nato talking tough but not be willing to have to return thousands of soldiers in body bags. Remember the charade of cowardice with the months-lasting bombing of Serbia, which still did not significantly reduce its war ability and no invasion would happen.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

It was a few weeks of staring at each other with menacing eyes, and barely a few days of rolling through Iraqi units with a deathcount so low there were more case of friendly fire than killings from the enemy.

Staring each other? What are you speaking about? It was a few weeks of massively bombing Sadam army before sending the troops. It seems there are some skewed memories regarding this topic. Hope you generals have more long term memory.

 

[Perfection]

2.934%

 

[GoodSarmatian]

@Akka ^Don't underestimate nato talking tough but not be willing to have to return thousands of soldiers in body bags. Remember the charade of cowardice with the months-lasting bombing of Serbia, which still did not significantly reduce its war ability and no invasion would happen.

NATO also claimed every day that they didn't lose any planes, while Serbian state TV made the ludicrous claim claim that they shot down dozens after every bombing run. Then Serbia took out an F-117 and spread pictures of the wreckage. The official version became "Yes, the Serbs shot down a stealth bomber, that really is the only plane they shot down".
Still a great sucess for NATO. They destroyed bridges, roads, a car factory, a TV station -which was a legitimate target because it spread propaganda-, a couple of hospitals and the Chinese embassy. I'm giving them the benefit of doubt that the grade school they bombed was just collateral damage.

 

[Commodore]

Nope i didnt claim it would be easy, i claimed it was possible and i claimed it would be quick If happens. In fact they would be in Seoul in a matter of hours. It is only 40 km away from the frontier.

Sure, they'd be in Seoul in a few hours...after weeks of hard fighting at the front which would give South Korea and its allies time to prepare secondary and tertiary defense lines to stall the offensive even further. I'm still waiting to hear exactly what it is that makes you think North Korea could even achieve a breakthrough with the current state of their military. I mean, I've backed up my position on the matter while your responses have been nothing but you just making the same claim over and over again without providing any supporting stats or analysis.

So I ask again: What is it about the current state of North Korea's military that makes you think they could achieve a quick breakthrough in the opening hours of a reopening of hostilities with the south?

EDIT: Also, I'm starting to suspect you lack any real understanding of exactly how modern wars are fought, given that you still seem to think artillery and tanks are what will win the day. Sure, you still need ground forces to take and hold territory, but the vast majority of killing and destruction in modern wars are not done by the ground-pounders. It's navies with their long-range missiles and air forces that do all the heavy lifting now with ground forces pretty much just pulling "mop up" duty. And seeing as those are two areas where North Korea is completely inadequate when compared to South Korea, their chances of having any success in an offensive war against South Korea are extremely slim.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Whatever DPRK might accomplish in a shooting war, I don't think it would become "WWIII." If there's a danger of a larger war, it's in the Middle East. Still, I think you need to contrive some kind of Tom Clancy-style scenario to get there.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Sure, they'd be in Seoul in a few hours...after weeks of hard fighting at the front which would give South Korea and its allies time to prepare secondary and tertiary defense lines to stall the offensive even further. I'm still waiting to hear exactly what it is that makes you think North Korea could even achieve a breakthrough with the current state of their military. I mean, I've backed up my position on the matter while your responses have been nothing but you just making the same claim over and over again without providing any supporting stats or analysis.

So I ask again: What is it about the current state of North Korea's military that makes you think they could achieve a quick breakthrough in the opening hours of a reopening of hostilities with the south?

EDIT: Also, I'm starting to suspect you lack any real understanding of exactly how modern wars are fought, given that you still seem to think artillery and tanks are what will win the day. Sure, you still need ground forces to take and hold territory, but the vast majority of killing and destruction in modern wars are not done by the ground-pounders. It's navies with their long-range missiles and air forces that do all the heavy lifting now with ground forces pretty much just pulling "mop up" duty. And seeing as those are two areas where North Korea is completely inadequate when compared to South Korea, their chances of having any success in an offensive war against South Korea are extremely slim.

Thanks for the explanation mein general. However i would like to add that you continue thinking in therms of that comfy glorious gulf war where you had a ton of time to bomb all those tanks in the desert waiting for your bombs as sitting duks. It is a very different case here. North Korea has the higher world concentration of heavy artillery already placed around Seoul. In case of war the first think would be NK trying a breakthrough and it could place a barrage much more dense and powerful that any bunch of long range missiles just over ROK defensive lines in matter of minutes, just before launching some thousands of tanks and lots of infantry through the field of craters. It is a very different and unpredictable fast paced scenery the one we have here where you may have not time to enjoy your technological superiority.

 

[Akka]

Staring each other? What are you speaking about? It was a few weeks of massively bombing Sadam army before sending the troops. It seems there are some skewed memories regarding this topic. Hope you generals have more long term memory.

Of course there was a lot of bombing, but even then a lot of Iraqi forces were pretty much intact (camouflaged and dug up in the desert worked better than expected) and still melted when encountering allied in ground fight.

Also, one of your argument was that NK could somehow tear through SK and reach Seoul (though how an army that has a slight edge in number and a catastrophic disadvantage in technology could somehow overpower its foe is still unexplained), and the Iraq war show that precisely, air power can hinder a lot such operation "on the fly" (huhu) with barely any warning, like the Khafji skirmish showed.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Explication is in the above post. About the Khafji skirmish, It also can be read the other way around: even after a month of being continuous bombed by coallition aircraft iraqi army was able to capture the town in a situation of total inferiority.

In Korea we would had a massive assault carried by intact (and fanatical) NK forces, supported by superior artillery and under a very dense anti-air umbrella. First hours in such scenery would be very critical for the south.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Thorga's point is that the air superiority here includes missile superiority in the first stage, Akka. And i doubt anyone would be wanting to be in Seoul if the artillegy barrage comes, cause it will pretty much have an effect analogous to aerial bombardment.

 

[Akka]

Bombing Seoul would be pointless for an offensive - it would serve only as a warning for the SK/US military, and allow for a massive missile/air barrage to counter-bomb the artillery. Civilian casualties would be terrible, but it would be military suicide. It's more a retaliation threat than an offensive one - STARTING a war with that would be completely stupid and counter-productive for NK.

Bombing the SK lines would be more efficient, but I'm pretty sure their defenses have been precisely made against this very scenario, and even a strong artillery barrage isn't a magical spell allowing to tear through an equivalent and prepared foe (or else WW1 would have ended a lot sooner).

Having the highest density of military asset is actually a very bad point for NK, it means a lot of damage can be dealt very quickly, BTW.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I agree on that, most NK artillery would be dedicated to support the attack but some big shells would hit Seoul too with all probability. They have plenty of it after all. I would pack and get out the city asap anyway.

And if things start going wrong, high density of enemy forces invites to the use of tactical nukes more than anything else, which was my point.