Realistically, would a conventional US land and air invasion against North Korea be feasible?

Realistically, would a conventional US land and air invasion against North Korea be feasible?

yes but with very high casualties.

what are your victory conditions?

it would devastate both halves of the peninsula, like Mad Max levels of civilization wiping.

It would work, but Best Korea would have a field day raining shit down on China, Russia, South Korea and Japan while we were invading.

Would North Korea even dare to nuke the south? The entire world would ally against them.

aside form China, how is that any different than right now?

NK operates on the principle that the South is already theirs, occupied by US invaders. They would feel it's nobody else's business

The only reason nobody has done it yet is because they keep threatening "to rain nuclear fire" on everyone. I think if we suddenly invaded, he'd go for it while saying "I told you fucks I wasn't playing around."

We'd be talking about total war between the world against North Korea. They would lose. North Korea doesn't even have proper nuke capabilities against Europe and the US.

NK's high command knows they'll be killed if they actually use nukes, would probably negotiate surrender in exchange for alleviating their war crimes

Not a single person in the world has a scenario where the North wins, but that's not the point. This thread is about the US initiating combat, meaning they either get pasted by us, or pasted by us and everyone else. It's Titanic deck chairs.

I don't think a successful war is possible anymore after Vietnam. We would need to realize that war is hell and stop caring about how the media reports it. If we went back to having no concern about civilian casualties it would be a pushover.

The outcome isn't the problem. The problem is that they can nail Beijing, Seoul, Tokyo and Vladivostok without too much work. And what's the point of taking Pyongyang if that whole region is literally glowing in the dark afterwards?

>Kim actually starts war
>USA drops millions of gallons of knockout gas to the entire country
>Kim too poor for gas masks
>We walk in with knives
>Kill all the military
>Kill all the leaders
>War over

We have the capability to turn the entire country of NK into scorched earth before they ever knew they were being attacked. We just don't have enough balls to win anymore and it will be our demise.

let's not overstate things here. Their nukes are pitiful and wonky, their missiles are ghetto-rigged as fuck, and just as apt to land two nations over from where they are aimed. In the mega-crunch that is real time war, Murphy will shit all over their tech and no one would be safe.

>tfw the US dropped 2 (two) atomic bombs on civilians in the past
>tfw no balls to do it again

>knockout gas

because war is basically a 1960s spy TV show.

You would never see US soilders on the ground before a massive air and sea bombing campaign.

your math is so wrong I'm not completely sure you'll be able to read this.

The moment they aim a nuke at a city, they will have 5 aimed and fired at Pyongyang.

>US only one to drop bomb on civilians.
>US has biggest balls. Rest of the world trying to find theirs.

>sociopathy is gradually being phased out of international politicking

that's technically a win.

And let's not understate the fact that if Murphy strikes us and a nuke pops off in China or Russia what will we say? "Oops" isn't going to stop anyone from saying "Since the Americans caused this shit, we'll do the same to them."

Are you retarded? You think countries will ally with NK after being nuked by it?

>math
>read
>no math involved

You mean like now, where Best Korea pops off a missile and our response is to send Pence to "show our determination" by posing for cameras?

I'm not following. Are you saying that our nukes are as prone to failure as NK? And why would we even consider nukes, we have plenty more options.

low quality bait for low quality fish. HAHA!

>eats bad fish
>dies

You seem to miss the point of the it.

No. What if NK finds out and lobs their shit before our shit gets there?

>Realistically, would a conventional US land and air invasion against North Korea be feasible?

They are using 1980s era weapons. All of that heavy hardware in their parades are just empty facades. A single US carrier group would destroy most of NK's military hardware with airstrikes alone. A war with them would be a joke. Target practice. The real war would come after the leadership collapses, and the nation with it, leaving 25 million desperate civilians who still worship their god-king.

this isn't MGSV noob

If we are basing this war on the assumption that China and Russia do not intervene on the side of North Korea then. Yes, its quite feasible. However if China or Russia or both intervene the best case scenario is what we are facing now. A North and South Korea

Again, Why is our shit in the air? Trump? Don't fag this up with his orange ass.

>The real war would come after the leadership collapses, and the nation with it, leaving 25 million desperate civilians who still worship their god-king.
I'm pretty sure they don't worship him for real. They're forced to worship him or face prison and/or execution of an entire 3 generations of family.

This. There are no targets in NK big enough to warrant nuclear weapons. Also despite how everyone feels about us I don't think we are dumb enough to use nuclear weapons again, we keep them merely as a balance of power. We could level the country with non-nuclear cruise missiles.

replace "worship their god-king" with "would really like some food now", and you've pretty much got it.

He's irrelevant to this. I'm speaking purely of "what will they do if we invade" regardless of who actually does the invading.

You think we can force them to surrender with the promise of quality food and unrestricted internet access?

This really doesnt make a whole lot of difference in Korea. Especially where Mechinized divisions are concerned. The topography of Korea is such that any war in Korea will be faught by infantry. Infantry do not need super high tech gadgets to be effective. North Korea has enough infantry to make a war a very bloody affair

So, no US nukes, then? Just the NK roman candles? The ones that run a 30/70 chance of even going off? Who's going to thnk that the solution to one of those misfired is to launch on America, who would still have their full arsenal ready?

the ones in charge already have that.

They have been gearing for war for the past 50 years. They don't even need nukes. The amount of conventional/biological/chemical weapons pointed at the south is enough to destroy most populated areas in minutes. They have entire mountains embedded with bunkers full of fuckery. There is no easy options with North Korea

re-emphasis on "No one is safe"

The civilians and most of the army doesnt

The manority of North Koreas artilerly can only reach a few km inside South Koreas boarders. But that said you are absolutly right that its enough to cause wide scale death upon millions

fine, by all means try to make an appeal to the Have-nots without the Haves noticing and per-empitvely intervening. If you succeed, you will have turned social engineering on its head.

A misfired nuke is still a mess to clean up later. Never mind all the other nasty shit they have squirreled away for their coming out party.

We have the capability of leveling all of their artillery and missile sites simultaneously. We just wouldn't because there would be too many civilian casualties and it would make it look like NK isn't even trying to fight back. Then a bunch of limp dicked pussies will protest because we are committing "war crimes."

I vote we napalm it first.

The civilians and most of the army are not stupid enough to rise up. If there is an actual invation and large coridors are opened in the dmz, i am sure a huge portion of the civilian population will make good their escape to the south. But they will not try and bring this on themselves

I hate to tell you, but wholesale slaughter of a civilian population is actually a war crime, no matter who is doing the slaughtering.

War crimes dont matter if you are the victor

>war crime
>war

no rules in war, only losers and victors.

Are you retarded?

i dont know have you tried it before?

I'm not arguing that. Just that somehow it would be seen as cause for retribution against the US.

It's only a war crime when someone that's not the united States doing it.
We don't really Fucking care.

It's also the trolley problem. Killing a few to save many is a hard decision but the correct one.

Actually user, there are "laws" to war. Google "laws of war", but only civilised countries follow them. I highly doubt NK will abide by them.

yeah, still waiting to see how it shakes out, though.

geneva convention mean anything to you pleb?

lol fair point

Only if we first convinced everyone else that it was necessary to eradicate the population and proceeded to do just that.

I know that, I'm disagreeing with it. The geneva convention is a stupid hollow gesture that never actually gets followed anyway, it merely is something to point at in order to make us look like the bad guy.

No we dont. Even if you are able to forward deploy the entire US Air Force, North Korea will be able to rain down hellfire before any effective counter battery or air strikes are able to deal with the artilery in range of the South

They used Napalm in the first Korean war. Nato had complete contol of the air. It didnt stop a largely infantry based attack by the Chinese from pushing all Nato and South Korean forces south of Souel.

Let's not forget Allies targeting German civilians in air raids or the U.S. demostrating its power at the end of war but we didnt face any consequences for deliberately targeting civilians

Not really. It's a piece of paper.

I know a guy who's good for that. He lives in a mansion north of the Potomac... or is it a high-rise in Manhattan?

filthy imperialists at it again

Piece of paper that hung quite a few Germans and Japs though.

fuck conventional. I say we just project pluto them.

No problem... We'll just have Seth Rogan and James Franco go handle it..

Obviously we weren't aggressive enough.

Beacuse U.S population hated the germans in that time but now with the SJW and other people like this it could end bad for the U.S

we have all done shameful things in war the point is to not repeat the same mistakes. we learn and move forward

We don't even need airstrikes we could do it with cruise missiles. However even with an aistrike, if we coordinate properly by the time they react to the first strike the last strike will have already finished. They will still have a few sites that our intel doesn't know about but I am willing to bet we are aware of at least 90% of their weaponry and we have enough planes and ships to attack all of them simultaneously.

Jesus, put that away, you want Dorito Mussolini catching wind of that shit? He'd order a million of em

yeah but they lost, and at that some of the evidence was faked or at least attempted to be faked

Didn't really need that piece of paper to do it. It just "legitimized" killin' 'em.

who the FUCK is gonna tell the United States that they can't bomb the shit out of NK and kill civilians in the process!?! Everybody hates them except china every other country will just turn the other cheek like nothing ever happened

against the goddamn People Liberation Army? That's a no-prize, there's no one that aggressive in the Solar system.

like the decleration of independence or the magna carta? fucking degenerate.

The geneva convention is simply a guideline for losing wars. No war will ever be won by someone following it and people that don't follow it almost always get away with doing such.

what are we, here, about three posts away form Holocaust denial?

Essentially. The only difference is that I value the lives and freedom of my countrymen. Tribalistic as all hell, yes. No I don't care.

You honestly believe the holocaust happened?

I do believe the holocaust happened but I honestly believe it's been exaggerated, as have the actions of all of our enemies. However I don't see the correlation. It's like saying there are rules to a street fight..."you may lose but at least lose with honor" well losing with honor isn't going to make you less dead.

countries are just lines on pieces of paper, and patriotism just charismatic speeches by generals and drill sergeants.

The US would launch a tactical strike against NK. This isn't Normandy.

Okay, I caused that, clearly.

those who fail to learn the lessons of the past are doomed to repeat them. Read a book. wilful ignorance is nothing to be proud of.

You're right! And unfortunately North Korea is very happy to war crime the shit out of South Korea over *those* pieces of paper, and America has a sizable investment in that area. Like any good business it's best if we protect our assets.

armies don't fight wars to live, they fight wars to ensure their citizens live. If there are rules, and an army breaks them, they run the risk of the people back home suffering when it's all over due to sanctions or other punishments.

If he nuked SK the nuclear fallout would devastate NK. He can't hit the US with an ICBM because they don't possess the knowledge to build a reentry vehicle.

I'm pretty sure the guys in NK are fighting so that their families aren't executed by the government.

Tbh Kim seems like a terrorist. He'd turn his country into a bomb and just light off everthing he has in his own cities, allah ackbar style

We haven't really fought a necessary war since ww2, and we've arguably lost every war since then because the media is able to report on the war crimes that we always commit because they are necessary to win.