What happens if Trump nukes North Korea?

Nabber

South Korea could defeat NK. SK are not a helpless nation

Akrasia

Elijah Odd Adventurer wrote: »

Whatever about instigating a war, nuking a country is so fcuked up. Even using low yield strategic nuclear warheads, it's still very risky.



Kosovo was 20 years ago. That's a massive time frame where military technology is concerned.

Eh, the US Military's main bomber is the B2, which was introduced 20 years ago. The only other combat plane introduced since then is the F22, which is 12 years old now and was a failure as they're no longer building them. The USAF only has 6 F22 squadrons. There are only so many missiles these planes can carry at a time.

the vast majority of U.S. combat aircraft are based on technology that is 30 years older or more.

Sure, they may have some advanced avionics to make them easier to fly, and better weapons (but offset by better countermeasures on) but military technology is slow moving. It takes decades to research and deploy new military technology.

The biggest advance has been in unmanned drone technology, but these things are now commercially available for surveilance. North Korea has drone technology that they can use to alert them of impending strikes against them and give them time to move their mobile assets out of harms way.

The element of surprise is still a huge military advantage, and this is something that should keep everyone worried. Trump or Kim won't declare war, they'll attack first and then declare war afterwards.

helimachoptor

the F22's/F35s can be picked up by low frequency radar, but while the radar knows they are there, actually getting a lock to fire a missile is the difficult part.

How i would see it playing out..

1) massive bombardment of cruise missiles, expect this mostly from US subs
that are close Korea, this reduces time to react and hammer Seoul with artiller

2) Very shortly after as in minutes, a massive follow up from Korean ships, US Ships, launching cruise missiles

3) Expect overwhelming air campaign with F22's, F35's (Marines are the only operational ones iirc) to take out SAM sites, B2's B52's, Gen 4 planes (F16s, F18's) cleaning up the rest.


This will be a massive logistical operation, including the US, Korea, Japan

jimmycrackcorm

helimachoptor wrote:

1) massive bombardment of cruise missiles, expect this mostly from US subs that are close Korea, this reduces time to react and hammer Seoul with artiller

helimachoptor wrote:

2) Very shortly after as in minutes, a massive follow up from Korean ships, US Ships, launching cruise missiles

helimachoptor wrote:

3) Expect overwhelming air campaign with F22's, F35's (Marines are the only operational ones iirc) to take out SAM sites, B2's B52's, Gen 4 planes (F16s, F18's) cleaning up the rest.

helimachoptor wrote:

This will be a massive logistical operation, including the US, Korea, Japan

Or just nuke them.

helimachoptor

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Or just nuke them.

Wont do it, too much risk of radiation sweeping down into Seoul and probably worse (for America) going into China.

This will be a conventional war, however if the US suspects as a last gasp NK are going to lob one into Seoul, it could happen then.

scamalert

japans SK combined forces with US would be enough to use existing tech and missiles to carpet bomb whole NK, since cessna jets they have and ak's are only usefull if one lives in taliban.at this day and age.

jimmycrackcorm

helimachoptor wrote:

Wont do it, too much risk of radiation sweeping down into Seoul and probably worse (for America) going into China.

Radiation might be acceptable in the sense that we already have had radiation exposure in Chernobyl and Fukushima.

helimachoptor wrote:

This will be a conventional war, however if the US suspects as a last gasp NK are going to lob one into Seoul, it could happen then.

They'd no way it'll be a conventional war as the U.S. won't get into another Vietnam situation. Plus why risk a conventional war when your enemy has nuclear weapons and are openly threatening to use them. Wait and see if they do?

ohnonotgmail

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Radiation might be acceptable in the sense that we already have had radiation exposure in Chernobyl and Fukushima.




They'd no way it'll be a conventional war as the U.S. won't get into another Vietnam situation. Plus why risk a conventional war when your enemy has nuclear weapons and are openly threatening to use them. Wait and see if they do?

Radiation exposure that close to the border and therefore to seoul would not be acceptable to SK.

helimachoptor

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Radiation might be acceptable in the sense that we already have had radiation exposure in Chernobyl and Fukushima.




They'd no way it'll be a conventional war as the U.S. won't get into another Vietnam situation. Plus why risk a conventional war when your enemy has nuclear weapons and are openly threatening to use them. Wait and see if they do?

Sorry more accurately, it will be a war using conventional weapons, i would imagine that the US would want to leave the clean up to SK.

Because going nuclear off the bad has risks aswell, what if you dont destroy the NK nukes, what happens if you miss and hit SK (ok small chance but still), what is the response from China/Russia when radiation starts affecting their people/crops/livestock etc

I would also doubt SK would want a nuke going off 200Km away n Pyonyang, in reality you'd expect the Nuke to be going off on the NK side of the DMZ to take out the artillery which is about 50Km from Seoul, a strong wind and Seoul gets a **** load of fall out a day or so after the nuke goes of.

Bob24

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Radiation exposure that close to the border and therefore to seoul would not be acceptable to SK.

Also while I don't know how the actual amount of radiations from a bomb and a powder plant accident compares, I can imagine that radiations in a war zone resulting from a bomb exploding in the air will spread much more and be much less difficult to manage that an accident within a constrained areas in a country at peace whereby you can freely deploy containment strategies around the area without being shot at.

Skylinehead

Akrasia wrote: »

Eh, the US Military's main bomber is the B2, which was introduced 20 years ago. The only other combat plane introduced since then is the F22

And the F-35, and the Super Hornets. Jets take literally 20 years to go into production, it's a long auld process.

Beta Ray Bill

scamalert wrote: »

japans SK combined forces with US would be enough to use existing tech and missiles to carpet bomb whole NK, since cessna jets they have and ak's are only usefull if one lives in taliban.at this day and age.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Or just nuke them.

You're talking about killing or injuring the guts 25 million people.

It's not acceptable in any way, shape or form.

Not to mention the birth defects that would be caused for decades.

Attacking is a mistake. If they attack many people will die.

If the US just left people alone they themselves would be left alone.

The very core of US culture though is:
"Us vs Them"
"We're the good guys, they're the bad guys!"

They need to have an enemy.

Think about it, can you honestly say you didn't think about joining the US army after watching Top Gun as a kid?

#Merica

Akrasia

The risks of nuclear fallout are hugely over stated. About 5 weeks after a nuclear blast, the area is down to safe levels which don't produce any additional cancer or birth defects or radiation sickness

After Hiroshema and Nagasaki, there were effects on babies in utero within 1.2km of the blast hypocentre, but any babies conceived afterwards were unaffected.

The risks of a single nuclear bomb are that a large number of people will be directly killed and maimed by the blast and ionising radiation released at the moment of the blast

The biggest risk of a single nuclear bomb is that it will cause a rapid response leading to the release of more nuclear bombs, and then we're talking about nuclear winter. Scientists in two seperate studies modeled the consequences of 'regional' nuclear war between India and Pakistan in which 100 hiroshema bombs were deployed. They predict that 2 billion people would starve from the famines that would last more than a decade and affect global food production.
http://www.ippnw.org/nuclear-famine.html

Ipso

grahambo wrote: »

You're talking about killing or injuring the guts 25 million people.

It's not acceptable in any way, shape or form.

Not to mention the birth defects that would be caused for decades.

Attacking is a mistake. If they attack many people will die.

If the US just left people alone they themselves would be left alone.

The very core of US culture though is:
"Us vs Them"
"We're the good guys, they're the bad guys!"

They need to have an enemy.

Think about it, can you honestly say you didn't think about joining the US army after watching Top Gun as a kid?

#Merica

100% correct, NK is a paradise with mensa members running the place.

Akrasia

You don't improve things by making them worse.

America cannot make the lives of the North Koreans any better by attacking them.

They can on the other hand be responsible for the deaths of billions of people by starting a nuclear war.

Infini

US wont nuke first because

1) They'll use conventional warfare first to either pulverise NK's forces without needing to invade to prove a point
2) They would wait till they have a valid "godzilla threshold" excuse for actually using their own nukes ie NK attempting or using theirs first
3) Nuclear fallout from use of said weapons could cross into china or japan and seriously scare the **** outta people not involved.

The whole reason nukes have never been used since WW2 is because of their sheer destructive power and contamination. The problem with NK is they pursued nukes thinking it will "save them" or "secure them". The only problem though is that noone cares about their dump of a country but by pushing the nukes issue theyre pretty much drawn enough attention to themselves that might get themselves owned.

aka NK: I demand your respect.
US: No you demand my attention.

Akrasia wrote: »

You don't improve things by making them worse.

America cannot make the lives of the North Koreans any better by attacking them.

They can on the other hand be responsible for the deaths of billions of people by starting a nuclear war.

To be clear NK is one of the last ****holes on the planet. The whole thing is a mess because of political meddling and china just simply being unwilling to simply cut the tools off from fuel and other supplies to force them to abandon the nukes. The biggest irony is by continuing to prop up this failed state its actually causing things to go against it like THAAD for example which would never have been deployed if NK hadnt started ramping up ICBM development.

The biggest danger here is at some point this clusterfuk of a situation IS gonna boil over either it will be a missile too far or NK is brave enough to do another Nuke test. At that point it might get to the stage that Armed Conflict might no longer be avoidable. The only thing thats kept things back so long has been the fear of retaliation on SK civilian areas but sooner or later it will come to a head. The ONLY question is who in NK will be stupid enough to try the nuclear option because it will be at that point that the US would retaliate with their own Nukes and all hell breaks loose.

Capt'n Midnight

During the Korean war the US used to fake atomic bombing by having B29's do the same run and dropping a large parachuted bomb and then leaving the scene PDQ. On radar you couldn't tell the difference until the expected detonation time.

Even then large bombs were too late as the Koreans were busy moving factories underground, just like the Russians in WWII who moved factories out of the enemy's reach. Nothing less than a nuke would take out a factory rehoused down a mine. And even then you might need a H-Bomb. And they've had since the 1950's to prepare.



Japan would go absolutely spare about the fallout.

South Korea, Russia and China being even closer might even do more than send a strongly worded letter to the Times.

Gatling

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Even then large bombs were too late as the Koreans were busy moving factories underground, just like the Russians in WWII who moved factories out of the enemy's reach. Nothing less than a nuke would take out a factory rehoused down a mine.

Thermobaric weapons would be ideal if they can be put through entrances ,
Given now the US have a large inventory of Thermobaric bombs and missles that can be launched from many platforms ,
And thats before they have to go with the big party tricks

prinzeugen

Gatling wrote: »

Thermobaric weapons would be ideal if they can be put through entrances ,
Given now the US have a large inventory of Thermobaric bombs and missles that can be launched from many platforms ,
And thats before they have to go with the big party tricks

If you look on Google maps, all NK's hangars etc are underground under mountains.

You don't need to have a direct hit on a target to do the most damage.

The "dome" in France that was thought to be a V2 site during WW2 was taken out by a bomb that missed by accident.

A few well placed bombs could cause landslides that will entomb the North Korean military under millions of tons of rock.

Aristotle145

prinzeugen wrote: »

If you look on Google maps, all NK's hangars etc are underground under mountains.

You don't need to have a direct hit on a target to do the most damage.

The "dome" in France that was thought to be a V2 site during WW2 was taken out by a bomb that missed by accident.

A few well placed bombs could cause landslides that will entomb the North Korean military under millions of tons of rock.

The MOAB is a good choice for concrete underground bunkers and hangars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqfosAxT4CI

Gatling

Aristotle145 wrote: »

The MOAB is a good choice for concrete underground bunkers and hangars.

Not really actually ,there is better munitions available fortunately,

Aristotle145

Gatling wrote: »

Not really actually ,there is better munitions available fortunately,

There is the MOAB and the MOP.
Dont think you will find anything better unless you go nuclear.

howamidifferent

Someone's eager for war....

Gatling

Some one doesn't realise "thousands die "over there will include american lives,

Has Kim any friends

Even President Rodrigo Duterte on Wednesday described North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as a "fool" and a "son of a bitch",

That chubby face that looks kind. That son of a bitch. If he commits a mistake, the Far East will become an arid land. It must be stopped, this nuclear war.

"A limited confrontation and it blows up here, I will tell you, the fallout can deplete the soil, the resources and I don't know what will happen to us."

Manic Moran

Gatling wrote: »

Some one doesn't realise "thousands die "over there will include american lives,

Occupational hazard for us. It's the American civilians that he's more concerned about, I think. And justifiably so.

blackcard

Looks like this is closer to happening

Billy86

Don't forget though, vote Trump for world peace and US isolationism! :pac:

This is what happens when you have two narcissistic, delusional sociopaths whose entire lives have been utterly detached from reality each given nuclear toys to play with. I wouldn't put it past either to look eagerly to have the button pressed on it, in Kim's mind if he felt he was being pushed too often and in Trump's if he felt it would give him a bit of an ego boost via the bump in approval ratings that go with US presidents and war, or that it would distract from the colluding with Russia. Both are genuinely so delusional and such dangerous lunatics that I wouldn't rule either out entirely, and would just hope that those around them have the abilities to stop them if it comes to it.

BillyBobBS

Billy86 wrote: »

Don't forget though, vote Trump for world peace and US isolationism! :pac:

This is what happens when you have two narcissistic, delusional sociopaths whose entire lives have been utterly detached from reality each given nuclear toys to play with. I wouldn't put it past either to look eagerly to have the button pressed on it, in Kim's mind if he felt he was being pushed too often and in Trump's if he felt it would give him a bit of an ego boost via the bump in approval ratings that go with US presidents and war, or that it would distract from the colluding with Russia. Both are genuinely so delusional and such dangerous lunatics that I wouldn't rule either out entirely, and would just hope that those around them have the abilities to stop them if it comes to it.

It's Obama's, Bushes and Clinton fault we are at the stage when president Trump has to make the call here. Obama in particular was an utter disaster when it came to NK.

Billy86

BillyBobBS wrote: »

Billy86 wrote: »

Don't forget though, vote Trump for world peace and US isolationism! :pac:

This is what happens when you have two narcissistic, delusional sociopaths whose entire lives have been utterly detached from reality each given nuclear toys to play with. I wouldn't put it past either to look eagerly to have the button pressed on it, in Kim's mind if he felt he was being pushed too often and in Trump's if he felt it would give him a bit of an ego boost via the bump in approval ratings that go with US presidents and war, or that it would distract from the colluding with Russia. Both are genuinely so delusional and such dangerous lunatics that I wouldn't rule either out entirely, and would just hope that those around them have the abilities to stop them if it comes to it.

It's Obama's, Bushes and Clinton fault we are at the stage when president Trump has to make the call here. Obama in particular was an utter disaster when it came to NK.

If Trump tries to nuke north Korea, it is Trump fault he tried to nuke north Korea. There are no two ways about it and his mental instability was repeatedly for this exact reason. We can only hope Trump proves to be as important and useless in this as he has on getting. More or less anything done since taking office, because there may well be a better chance of him just failing in his efforts than there are in seeing sense with how low his polling numbers are and how fragile his ego is.

silverharp

the news that NK are much further ahead sounds like BS, and similar to the nonsense that came out before the Iraq war.