North Korean Military.
- Thread starter F-15 Eagle
- Start date
gazzzwp
Member
Russia moving materiel to the border with North Korea:
Russia: North Korea border troop movements 'our business' | Euronews
The Chinese air force on high alert:
North Korea: China bombers on 'high alert,' US official says - CNNPolitics.com
Could all of this be a subtle warning to the US or is it just Russia and China taking precautions?
I'm puzzled by these reports.
Russia: North Korea border troop movements 'our business' | Euronews
The Chinese air force on high alert:
North Korea: China bombers on 'high alert,' US official says - CNNPolitics.com
Could all of this be a subtle warning to the US or is it just Russia and China taking precautions?
I'm puzzled by these reports.
china taking precautions
russia signalling to both the US and china
gazzzwp
Member
Can you offer more conjecture on this please?
china has always prepositioned large numbers of troops on the border whenever there is a crisis and where they have concerns that they could end up with a refugee issue - and I would assume that they would be looking enhancing support to their "non existent" NEST team in case things go pear shaped
russia would see it as an opportunity to revive and enhance their old dormant relationship - they can take advantage of the fact that NK's principle ally doesn't have as much leverage. that china has created a wedge by cautioning NK about its behaviour and that its another opportunity to firm the resolve of NK against the US and magnify US difficulties in coming out of this "cleanly"
Both China and Russia are taking precautions in case the rhetoric between NK and US turns from bluster to shooting. They have their own interests to protect and neither country wants a unified Korea, friendly and in league with the US on their borders. Also, more importantly, if a shooting war were to occur they do not want any spillovers across their borders, from armed troops, interventions, through to large influxes of NK refugees. They are saying to both parties that they will take action, including the use of military force, if required, to protect their territorial integrity and interests. That is the message.
EDIT: FYI. No formal peace has been signed between NK and SK and the UN Forces. Technically they are still at war and the current "peace" since 1953 is a cease fire. That is one of the benefits of being aware of the history because those who ignore history do not understand nor comprehend its significant impact upon current events.
Last edited:
gazzzwp
Member
I understand them for massing troops to deny a refugee surge but why put the bomber force on emergency standby?
Another example then of Russia looking for allies in the darkest of places? Just like they recently Snuggled up to Duterte just as the US has a break up with the Philippines. Makes sense I suppose but that's low even by Russian standards.
gazzzwp
Member
My prediction is that Russia will emerge from left field with a 'solution'; probably diplomatic but I would even not rule out some kind of military pact with the DPRK in an attempt to thwart any US led military action.
This would be in line with Russia's stance at the moment both in terms of expanding it's global influence and driving a wedge in between the US, it's allies and it's aspirations. Where this would lead Russian relations with China is anyone's guess.
A good article below on the economic and political situation between China, DPRK, South Korea and China. Worth a read.
Russia’s North Korea Conundrum | The Diplomat
Don't know if it would be a military pact because even Putin would most likely be very wary of being drawn into any conflicts by the current NK leadership's tendency towards provocative acts without concern for the consequences. The cycle of provocative dummy spitting emanating from Pyongyang has increased in the shrilling index and now they have threatened a nuclear attack against Australia because they didn't like the Aussie Foreign Minister speaking the truth.
And the NZ view:
So basically NZ is saying exactly the same thing as Australia, however the difference is that we are not in "lock step" with the US to quote the Australian Prime Minister describing Australia's position. We have a more independent foreign policy.
The NK's have test fired another missile which apparently failed shortly after launch. Reaction from the US and the PRC is yet to be forthcoming.
Well this is downright comical. How do you react to a defiant test launch that prominently fails?
the concerned
Active Member
I understand the diplomatic approach but surely even China can read what Kim Jong un is saying. He intends to develop a capability to strike the US first calling it a pre-emptive strike . What China needs to ask itself is does it tolerate a strike now to prevent that happening or does it wait for nuclear exchange in a few years time
Kim Jong-Un isn't going to attack the USA. He knows that would mean the end of his state, & probably of his life. He wants nukes to prevent him being Saddamed or Gaddafied. The massive army, the long-range guns & rocket launchers poised to rain death on Seoul - these are all for one purpose, & one purpose only: to keep the Kim family & its cronies in the luxury to which they are accustomed.
Within the parameters of a spoilt brat who enjoys watching people he dislikes (e.g. his late uncle) shredded by anti-aircraft guns, he appears to be rational. I don't think he's going to do anything likely to end his fun.
Within the parameters of a spoilt brat who enjoys watching people he dislikes (e.g. his late uncle) shredded by anti-aircraft guns, he appears to be rational. I don't think he's going to do anything likely to end his fun.
Agree with that, he won't !! But Donald just might !! Time will tell
It doesn't matter what Kim will or will not do. Or his successor. What matters is that this rogue regime cannot be allowed to develop WMD because they have proven their aggressive behaviour. They may also share these weapons or technology with other states.
I believe at some point some surgical strike will set their program back a decade or more. And their response will be an artillery barrage and bold statements while downplaying the results of the strike and overstating the devastation their guns unleashed. China will have been notified beforehand and after the strike will just call for "restraint" from all sides.
I believe at some point some surgical strike will set their program back a decade or more. And their response will be an artillery barrage and bold statements while downplaying the results of the strike and overstating the devastation their guns unleashed. China will have been notified beforehand and after the strike will just call for "restraint" from all sides.
Kasatka
Member
In the hypothetical case that the US ousted the Kim's from power by military means, some questions arise:
a.1) What would China do with tall the refugees fleeing to their borders?
a.2) Would China allow that regime to fall and be, potentially, filled by a pro-western one?
a.3) What position would China hold if the US actually attacked North Korea (taking both previous considerations into account). Especially if they did so in a preemptive fashion.
b) Replace China by Russia in the 3 questions above.
Personally, the most likely scenario that comes to my mind (if things indeed do heat up), is that the US will try to limit its intervention to a strategic bombing campeing: key military/scientific installations in North Korea. But even so, idk how much intel US and South Korea actually have on those to make them really effective; making them not much more than a show of force. It's also unclear how far the US and South Korea think that the North would retaliate.
For sure, in that case the US would be really outside of its comfort zone. They would have to deal with a situation very similar to the one they had with Saddam during Desert Storm, where Iraq fired scuds against Israel. South Korea knows that, and it's unclear to me how fond they would be about an American limited (is the key word) strike mission to Kim's facilities. Things could escalate. If they do, you have the problems with neighboring great powers that I mentioned in my questions above.
So in the end the most likely outcome is that nothing military will happen. If anything military happens, A LOT of under the table negotiation would have to happen between China, Russia and the US.
Thanks for baring with me.
Btw.: This is all considering a conventional military escalation profile. Not sure about a nuclear, chemical/biological one.
gazzzwp
Member
Classic example of creative media. Significant disparity between the US and Russian take on the latest missile launch.
CNN saying it landed 'close to Russia'.
North Korea tests missile Russia Guam - CNN.com
Also Putin apparently concerned.
RT saying that it landed 500km away and no threat to Russian territory.
https://www.rt.com/news/388315-korea-missile-russia-threat/
Who is right?
CNN saying it landed 'close to Russia'.
North Korea tests missile Russia Guam - CNN.com
Also Putin apparently concerned.
RT saying that it landed 500km away and no threat to Russian territory.
https://www.rt.com/news/388315-korea-missile-russia-threat/
Who is right?
Close is a fungible term, and threats are often a matter of opinion. So...
On a serious note, Russia has allegedly redeployed surface to air assets to both monitor DPRK launches and intercept them if they appear to be falling on Russian cities. To me that says more about whether it's a threat or not then any public statement.
Blue Jay
Member
Hypothetical "2nd" Korean War – what the real fight would be:
The Day After the Second Korean War | The Diplomat
Brief Overview:
This fascinating Diplomat article takes the position that, while people tend to focus on the tremendously destructive conventional clash that would happen in the event of a war on the Korean Peninsula, the real fight would come afterwards in the form of a post-war North Korean insurgency. Much like how the United States's wars in Iraq ended with stunning conventional victories, but became bogged down in COIN operations, a similar situation is likely to arise in post-war North Korea. As such, in order to address this potential threat, military planners should not only focus on conventional military strategy, but also a counterinsurgency plan. The article identifies the keystone of any such plan as the implementation of a Rule of Law in post-war North Korea that reflect indigenous values; more specifically, Confucianism, and "Juche".
~End of Overview~
Not only an interesting, but a valuable read, as it delves into the beginnings of a real plan of "What Next?" should military victory be achieved in a modern Korean conflict. Not only that, however, but it provides good insights for a peaceful reunification, if we are ever so lucky to see one of those in our lifetimes.
The discussion in this article and its mention of Iraq as a historical example also made me think of some other nations. Namely, Japan, which after its defeat in WWII was occupied and ruled by the US Military, yet somehow didn't turn into a big guerrilla warfare mess. How was this achieved, especially considering the Japanese tendency to never stop fighting back then? So by looking back in time, it seems that there are not only mistakes for us to learn from, but success from which we can gain valuable lessons as well.
The Day After the Second Korean War | The Diplomat
Brief Overview:
This fascinating Diplomat article takes the position that, while people tend to focus on the tremendously destructive conventional clash that would happen in the event of a war on the Korean Peninsula, the real fight would come afterwards in the form of a post-war North Korean insurgency. Much like how the United States's wars in Iraq ended with stunning conventional victories, but became bogged down in COIN operations, a similar situation is likely to arise in post-war North Korea. As such, in order to address this potential threat, military planners should not only focus on conventional military strategy, but also a counterinsurgency plan. The article identifies the keystone of any such plan as the implementation of a Rule of Law in post-war North Korea that reflect indigenous values; more specifically, Confucianism, and "Juche".
~End of Overview~
Not only an interesting, but a valuable read, as it delves into the beginnings of a real plan of "What Next?" should military victory be achieved in a modern Korean conflict. Not only that, however, but it provides good insights for a peaceful reunification, if we are ever so lucky to see one of those in our lifetimes.
The discussion in this article and its mention of Iraq as a historical example also made me think of some other nations. Namely, Japan, which after its defeat in WWII was occupied and ruled by the US Military, yet somehow didn't turn into a big guerrilla warfare mess. How was this achieved, especially considering the Japanese tendency to never stop fighting back then? So by looking back in time, it seems that there are not only mistakes for us to learn from, but success from which we can gain valuable lessons as well.