Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The big, main problem I have with all of this is that innocent North Koreans will probably die in the wake of any retaliation.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ss_s95)
    Vietnam war was different - the war between the north and south was essentially a war with the former Soviet Union and China (two huge powers at the time) against the US and its allies.

    Now however, Russia and China are unlikely to support North Korea because there's no incentive in store - both countries maintain economic relations with the US and support for NK would greatly damage that. The only other countries willing to support North Korea are Iran and Syria, and even they couldn't match up to the US, put together.

    And might I also add that NK is stuck in a time warp - they're improvising on obsolete technology they had since the Vietnam war, while the US has developed its arsenal much further since then.
    I'm disputing the fact that NK are in a time warp, but to simply dismiss them is foolish. If they were running around the Korean Peninsula with Bow and Arrows, then fair enough, but they are not. There weapons may well be a bit outdated, but they can still do a great deal of damage, and the NK troops will outnumber the US 2 to 1.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He wouldn't start a war with the USA, he would lose. He knows it.
    North Korea's only real ally is China and even they voted for the sanctions imposed against NK.
    Kim attacking South Korea is far more likely but that would rapidly descend into a "tit-for-tat" exchange yielding little fruit at the expense of lives.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I've got my Swiss Army Knife ready, bring it on.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The two options I see at the moment are:
    1. NK continues with threats but sees sense and doesn't take provocations too far, ie capture England, Germany, Russia's (et cetera) ambassadors
    2. NK captures ambassadors aswell as provoking America to start war, with other countries joining in for various reasons, starting WW3 (the very pessimistic option)

    Fun times hey!!!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone who thinks that North Korea has the fire power to launch nuclear missiles all the way to USA needs to rethink aerodynamics.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMagicRat)
    Yeah, I don't know why anyone here is proposing some crazy attack on North Korea as a whole. It is only the regime we don't like. We won't use nuclear weapons on an innocent civilian population. Our problem isn't with them at all.
    Erm actually America has done - twice.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HumanSupremacist)
    But having gotten past such a barrier, a united Korea would be a massively successful state - South Korea is already the 12th largest economy and is already greatly successful.
    An united Korea with an population of 80 million and having the Technological/Industrial output of S.Korea and the raw resources of the North Korea will give the Japanese and Chinese government heart attack! Although the Japanese are an US ally in the Pacific area, they would not like an strong unified Korea that can bargain for the Dokdo Islands in the Sea of Japan.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CelticSymphony67)
    I'm disputing the fact that NK are in a time warp, but to simply dismiss them is foolish. If they were running around the Korean Peninsula with Bow and Arrows, then fair enough, but they are not. There weapons may well be a bit outdated, but they can still do a great deal of damage, and the NK troops will outnumber the US 2 to 1.
    If it did come to war, the Americans wont go in and recreate the Gettysburg or Somme with thousands of troops either side, they would obliterate them from the air and then send in ground troops in vehicles and with heavy support to mop up the rest.

    Also i doubt that a nuke would even get half way there before the US or the SK brought it down
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    Erm actually America has done - twice.
    I knew someone was going to say that. I'd be very surprised if they did in this day and age and I'd be even more surprised if they did in North Korea.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nikkoch)
    The two options I see at the moment are:
    1. NK continues with threats but sees sense and doesn't take provocations too far, ie capture England, Germany, Russia's (et cetera) ambassadors
    2. NK captures ambassadors aswell as provoking America to start war, with other countries joining in for various reasons, starting WW3 (the very pessimistic option)

    Fun times hey!!!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Tbh, I very much doubt it will be WW3
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    If it did come to war, the Americans wont go in and recreate the Gettysburg or Somme with thousands of troops either side, they would obliterate them from the air and then send in ground troops in vehicles and with heavy support to mop up the rest.

    Also i doubt that a nuke would even get half way there before the US or the SK brought it down
    I agree this statement. The USA would use over 50 F-15E strike egeals to find and destroy all the Scud-C detrative NK missiles under an hour. Over 300 Tomahawks from the Ohio SSNB, LA attack sub, and the present Virginia class attack submarines will destroy the NK military command structure from the General staff building to the Infantry barracks. The Allied forces would have an superior C14 link system that gives top down commands from Staff Sargent to the 5 star General.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nikkoch)
    The two options I see at the moment are:
    1. NK continues with threats but sees sense and doesn't take provocations too far, ie capture England, Germany, Russia's (et cetera) ambassadors
    2. NK captures ambassadors aswell as provoking America to start war, with other countries joining in for various reasons, starting WW3 (the very pessimistic option)

    Fun times hey!!!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    There's no suggestion North Korea will capture ambassadors, they've merely said they can't guarantee their safety. It's just more threats of war.

    If North Korea did take foreigners hostage then it would be the final straw for the USA and allies. Making the same old vague threats against their ally South Korea is one thing, threatening foreign citizens is another. I expect China wouldn't be very impressed either that might be the final kick to their rapidly decaying alliance. Without China North Korea has no fuel or food (with its only other source of food aid being the USA...).
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sugar-n-spice)
    Does anyone know when the North Koreans first gained nuclear capabilities?
    I heard it was the late 1980s, when the Soviet Union started to break up.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    If it did come to war, the Americans wont go in and recreate the Gettysburg or Somme with thousands of troops either side, they would obliterate them from the air and then send in ground troops in vehicles and with heavy support to mop up the rest.

    Also i doubt that a nuke would even get half way there before the US or the SK brought it down
    Agreed. That is what the US will probably do. If it were troops on either side, unless the US got reinforcements, they would lose.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nikkoch)
    The two options I see at the moment are:
    1. NK continues with threats but sees sense and doesn't take provocations too far, ie capture England, Germany, Russia's (et cetera) ambassadors
    2. NK captures ambassadors aswell as provoking America to start war, with other countries joining in for various reasons, starting WW3 (the very pessimistic option)

    Fun times hey!!!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    :shock: Where did you get the idea that NK would take ambassadors hostage? Gosh, that would be terrible - goodness knows what the Russians, British and Japanese etc would do then?

    (Original post by silverbolt)
    If it did come to war, the Americans wont go in and recreate the Gettysburg or Somme with thousands of troops either side, they would obliterate them from the air and then send in ground troops in vehicles and with heavy support to mop up the rest.

    Also i doubt that a nuke would even get half way there before the US or the SK brought it down
    And don't forget those drones :sly:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    If it did come to war, the Americans wont go in and recreate the Gettysburg or Somme with thousands of troops either side, they would obliterate them from the air and then send in ground troops in vehicles and with heavy support to mop up the rest.

    Also i doubt that a nuke would even get half way there before the US or the SK brought it down
    What is tragic is the fallout damage that will ensue. And no neighbouring country is going to allow NK's rogue missile to stray into their territory
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pink pineapple)
    Tbh, I very much doubt it will be WW3
    I agree.

    I highly doubt that the North Korean situation would cause WW3 - on the other hand, unpredictable events could occur and rapidly escalate any crisis/conflict that may arise from the North Korean situation. For example (and we're taking a big leap here), other countries might craftily take advantage of a massive North Korean war (within the peninsula) to carry out their own interests...
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NabRoh)
    Anyone who thinks that North Korea has the fire power to launch nuclear missiles all the way to USA needs to rethink aerodynamics.
    Not sure where aerodynamics comes into it. It's entirely possible for a missile to be launched from any point on the planet and hit another point, even go right around the world and hit the launch site. It just need a rocket capable of reaching a high enough speed and altitude. Even a powerful enough gun could do it. Most ICBMs have a range that is capable of hitting most places on the planet. All the major nuclear powers could hit each other (and in the case of the UK and France with just submarines, they could still launch from home waters and hit any other nuclear armed country).
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pink pineapple)
    Tbh, I very much doubt it will be WW3
    Don't forget NK has a defence pact with China.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 16, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.