North korea threatens nukes

Originally posted by FMF
Would you expect China to stand aside and not act in any way?

well they did not last time did they? it would be better if they took our side but what are you gonna do?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Yes I do.

Compared to Iraq, how easy do you think it would be for the U.S. militray to beat or overrun the North, assuming resort to nuclear weapons was not practicable?

Originally posted by FMF
The U.S. is fighting on two fronts in westernn/central Asia. Would you say it could handle a full scale war on the Korean peninsular right now?

I think that the US would not be the only country involved in Korea, but China might jump in on the side of N. Korea which would make things a bit more difficult.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
well they did not last time did they? it would be better if they took our side but what are you gonna do?

So, would you expect China to stand aside and not act in any way?

Originally posted by Eladar
I think that the US would not be the only country involved in Korea, but China might jump in on the side of N. Korea which would make things a bit more difficult.

You say "it would make things a bit more difficult". If China jumped in on the side of N. Korea would the U.S. military still be able to win?

Originally posted by FMF
You say "it would make things a bit more difficult". If China jumped in on the side of N. Korea would the U.S. military still be able to win?

If we decided to nuke them, yes. If we didnt' go nuclear it would be an interesting contest: modern technology vs huge numbers of soldiers.

Originally posted by Eladar
If we decided to nuke them, yes. If we didnt' go nuclear it would be an interesting contest: modern technology vs huge numbers of soldiers.

How many weeks/months for the U.S./R.O.K. to defeat DPRK and install a new regime WITH China opposed to it, militarily? a. with nuclear weapons, b. without nuclear weapons?

Originally posted by FMF
How many weeks/months for the U.S./R.O.K. to defeat DPRK and install a new regime WITH China opposed to it, militarily? a. with nuclear weapons, b. without nuclear weapons?

I have not a clue. I don't think anyone does. Anyone who says they know is full of poop.

Originally posted by whodey
The North Koreans better be careful and not use nukes or the Obama administration might impose further sanctions upon them.

Yeh, and his teleprompter will have him saying mean things to them, after he says Let me be clear about this.

Originally posted by Eladar
I have not a clue. I don't think anyone does.

But you'd recommend this course of action regardless?

Originally posted by FMF
Compared to Iraq, how easy do you think it would be for the U.S. militray to beat or overrun the North, assuming resort to nuclear weapons was not practicable?

you cant even compare the two. Difficulty would be far greater w/ N,Korea though. However, the U.S. would not be going solo.
It would be messy but if the dam poilticians stay out of "rules of engagement" and let the Generals do what they do best the N.Koreans will get their asses handed to them.

Originally posted by FMF
How many weeks/months for the U.S./R.O.K. to defeat DPRK and install a new regime WITH China opposed to it, militarily? a. with nuclear weapons, b. without nuclear weapons?

If one of your scenarios unfolded, would the US and S. Korea have any option not involving military action?

By the way, I'm not so certain that China would back N. Korea as they did in 1950, and almost certain Russia would not. As allies, S. Korea and the US would not be constrained to the rules of engagement dictated by the UN as was the case in 1950.

Knowing these things, it would be suicidally mad for N. Korea to undertake one of your scenarios, although they might just be emboldened by their act of war sinking a S. Korean ship without any consequence.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
you cant even compare the two. Difficulty would be far greater w/ N,Korea though. However, the U.S. would not be going solo.
It would be messy but if the dam poilticians stay out of "rules of engagement" and let the Generals do what they do best the N.Koreans will get their asses handed to them.

Well of course you can compare the two. And you did. "Difficulty would be far greater w/ N.Korea". So there we have it. How long do you think it would take for the U.S./R.O.K. to defeat DPRK and install a new regime with China militarily opposing it and without the deployment of nuclear weapons?

Originally posted by normbenign
[N.Korea] might just be emboldened by their act of war sinking a S. Korean ship without any consequence.

What "consequence" should there have been to your way of thinking?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
you cant even compare the two. Difficulty would be far greater w/ N,Korea though. However, the U.S. would not be going solo.
It would be messy but if the dam poilticians stay out of "rules of engagement" and let the Generals do what they do best the N.Koreans will get their asses handed to them.

I don't believe the task would be that much more difficult. Although the actual "war" against the Iraqi military lasted only a couple of months.

In 1950 the N. Koreans took refuge across the Yalu River in China. I'm not so sure China would allow that today. In any case, with conventional weapons, minus politicians, they'ld soon regret their decision.