# Consequences of war with North Korea?



## barnyardfun (Mar 26, 2005)

Ok I am trying to keep up with everything that is going on but I'm kind of on information overload. I decided I need to step back and get back to the basics of just focusing on my family. So I humbly come to y'all for some help.

Can we run through some scenarios of what a possible war or an all out war would do?

What things do we need to work on prepping right now? Do you have a list of stuff you are trying to acquire in the near future in light of everything going on?

Since I really don't understand how all our overseas trades and such work could you tell me what things could possibly happen?

Thanks for trying to educate this momma. I spend so much time and energy on everyday life with the farm and kids it's sometimes hard to get any kind of focus on the outside world.


----------



## MichaelK! (Oct 22, 2010)

War with North Korea would be a trivial experience. We really could reduce their entire country to a single sheet of radiactive glass if we so chose to. That's after a single US city gets nuked by a Korean missile. But what if it's YOUR city?

The real issue with North Korea would be the involvement of China, a much, much more serious threat. Right now, America has a superior navy, missile, air force, and overall technology gap that the Chinese can not bridge. BUT, what happens if they find a way to disable our technological advantages?

We have clues that the Chinese are working on cyber weapons, and there's been recent evidence of various cyber attacks taking place on banks and such. Try to imagine what would happen if the Chinese implemented a ground invasion shortly after a coordinated cyber attack that knocked out the GPS satelite system, the internet, and the power grid all at the same time. While we're thinking about that, let's also throw in a single high altitude EMP burst that would stop most of the cars, trucks, and trains in the US.

Blind, without power, and unable to move men and materials to a war front, the Chinese (with their North Korean allies) could try taking over the US with WWII technology.


----------



## debbiekatiesmom (Feb 24, 2009)

call me fraidy cat, but i am heading to town today to top off everything a bit. the news this morning on tv was saying nk was going to send a missile at us in the next week. i'd much rather be just that much farther ahead on my prepping than caught w my drawers down. i'm so used to family calling me nutso that i really don't care anymore what people are thinking of me. happily making tracks now to town-hi ho hi ho...


----------



## unregistered29228 (Jan 9, 2008)

As much as I hate war and that innocent people are killed when a madman leader starts trouble, I think blasting NK would settle a lot of problems in our world. Other countries who would like to attack us would see that we have the guts and means to stop them or at least retaliate. We wouldn't be dragged into a long, costly, life sacrificing ground war with them. And peace in the region would finally be realized once NK wasn't constantly causing trouble.


----------



## RomeGrower (Feb 27, 2013)

I can see President Reagan getting in their face and letting them know if we hear one more word or action of threat from them we will completely disable their military with whatever force it takes until they are afraid to rattle their sabers again. We're long past that kind of leadership in our Country though.


----------



## sisterpine (May 9, 2004)

I believe that a war involving any of the technologically advanced countries would quickly spread world wide via that same technology and would be devestating to our country.


----------



## Mike in Ohio (Oct 29, 2002)

"Blast NK"? "Turn them into radioactive glass"?

Folks, have you ever been to South Korea? Do you realize how close to the border Seoul is? How small the Korean peninsula is?

We are not likely to use nuclear weapons ourselves. I don't think the Chinese, South Koreans or Japanese would be to happy with us if we did that in their backyard.

We and the South Koreans would be hard pressed if NK decides to invade the South. We have high tech - they have massive amounts of low tech military. 14,000 artillery tubes are pointed across the border towards Seoul.

We would likely respond with cruise missiles, air strikes and ship based attacks. We simply don't have boots on the ground or the ability to deploy them quickly or easily.

On the economic front we'd probably be looking at significant disruption to global supply chains. Stock market and most commodities would likely take a dump - at least in the short term. I'd look for a stronger dollar and higher gold/silver as Asians (and others) seek safety.

There is the possibility of NK trying to smuggle a nuke into the U.S. or one of our allies.

Just a few thoughts.

Mike


----------



## joseph97297 (Nov 20, 2007)

RomeGrower said:


> I can see President Reagan getting in their face and letting them know if we hear one more word or action of threat from them we will completely disable their military with whatever force it takes until they are afraid to rattle their sabers again. We're long past that kind of leadership in our Country though.



Ha, ha....like he did in Beirut? Yep, sure he would...after all, the man did get us into Grenada..... 

But who knows what his astrologer would tell him.

As for NKorea, I put as much worry into that as I do a mars attack. If they start something, I don't see China interceding or attacking us.


----------



## Cyngbaeld (May 20, 2004)

If China wanted to do a land invasion, they wouldn't have too much trouble since they control the canal and our southern border is laughable. 
I'm not concerned about NK except if China decided to use it as an excuse to escalate things.


----------



## barnyardfun (Mar 26, 2005)

Ok so we are talking everything from a non event to a land invasion. Great! (Sarcasm!) 

So basically need to just prep in general. Could be hard economic times or could be truly TEOTWAWKI? No electricity or technology back to the basics living. 

What are some of the things we use in our everyday lives that could be taken away if say China gets mad and just decides to cut us off?


----------



## irondale (Oct 3, 2012)

Mike in Ohio said:


> If the N Koreans tried an actual ground attack it will end very badly and in a very short time period for them. We can do a lot more then launch cruise missiles and air strikes. Plus the time it would take to stage for such an attack we would know about it long in advance.
> 
> However they can launch short range nukes, which is no small matter.


----------



## Elizabeth (Jun 4, 2002)

barnyardfun said:


> What are some of the things we use in our everyday lives that could be taken away if say China gets mad and just decides to cut us off?


Oh, just about everything one buys in the stores these days


----------



## Helena (May 10, 2002)

If NK sends a missle it won't end up in the US. At least this is what i understand..Japan maybe..but the man is a nut case for sure.I am sure NK news shows America is dire straights and living poorly. Prepare your family and have extras incase things get hard...but I don't think I'm heading to the bomb shelter yet...Not to make light of this situation because our soilders are in harms way. God is with US..


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Helena said:


> If NK sends a missle it won't end up in the US. At least this is what i understand..Japan maybe..but the man is a nut case for sure.I am sure NK news shows America is dire straights and living poorly. Prepare your family and have extras incase things get hard...but I don't think I'm heading to the bomb shelter yet...Not to make light of this situation because our soilders are in harms way. God is with US..


Japan is the only country that had 3 radioactive divisive to hit them except for Nevada. Our size will prevent them from killing more people. I am not saying it is alright to kill any body but you will get the message that most of all the other countries except the US, Russia, and China are less than a few states and many are the size of one states. If you want to prep for it learn the size of their weapons and learn that one blast will not cripple the US. And remember that during the fifties we had a lot of above ground testing in Nevada and the people down wind did not grow horns or tails.


----------



## Appalachia (Jul 11, 2012)

China is not going to invade us. They are too dependent on our money. Also, pretty much every other important trading partner they have is an ally of ours.... they wouldn't take too kindly to anyone invading us. 

Kim Jong Un is looney tunes though and he just might pull whatever trigger he has access to. I'm glad I don't live in South Korea or anywhere in the vicinity. I think it's all just chest thumping personally, but you never know.

Feel bad for the North Korean people......


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Appalachia said:


> China is not going to invade us. They are too dependent on our money. Also, pretty much every other important trading partner they have is an ally of ours.... they wouldn't take too kindly to anyone invading us...


That sounds good in theory, but shows a dramatic ignorance of history. In 1914 the largest source of foreign income for Germany was France. In 1939 Germany's largest source of foreign income was again France. In 1930s Japan's largest source of foreign income was China. In 1940 Japan's largest trading partner that they bought important raw materials from, was the USA.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

We should have gotten out of SK decades ago. We have no strategic interests there, no bases we can't live without, no natural resources, like oil, that we can't live without. If NK blows up SK, we would have to find a way to live without Kia cars and Samsung smartphones. It would be a disruption, but one we could deal with. we should not be spending our money or risking the lives of our troops to defend SK. They have a vibrant modern economy and should pay for their own defense. 

If our troops were not there, this event would be as important to us as the Syrian civil war.


----------



## Appalachia (Jul 11, 2012)

Pops2 said:


> That sounds good in theory, but shows a dramatic ignorance of history. In 1914 the largest source of foreign income for Germany was France. In 1939 Germany's largest source of foreign income was again France. In 1930s Japan's largest source of foreign income was China. In 1940 Japan's largest trading partner that they bought important raw materials from, was the USA.


Good point, but I think 'dramatic ignorance' is a little strong.

As a rule, countries are more interdependent now than pre-WWI or WWII. And if China invaded us, they would loose not only our trading, but would be at war NATO. C'mon man get real.


----------



## willbuck1 (Apr 4, 2010)

The potential gain for China if they could actually take over the US with some reasonable percentage of our tech base still intact would in the long term far out-way the short term loss. The Chinese take a much longer term view of things than we do and we always make the mistake of assuming that others view the world the same way that we do and their logic would arrive at the same conclusions. They start with a different worldview and so their logical process would not necessarily end up with the same conclusions. We make the same mistake with Moslems by assuming they will logically reach our conclusions but leaving out the fact that their religion starts their process from a far different place and defines acceptable goals as being very different from ours. When dealing with very different societies one must always keep in mind that if you don't really and truly understand how they think you always leave yourself open to making mistakes with very large consequences. The farther from a similar society they are the more room there is for both sides to make mistakes in interpreting the others thought processes.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Appalachia said:


> Good point, but I think 'dramatic ignorance' is a little strong.
> 
> As a rule, countries are more interdependent now than pre-WWI or WWII. And if China invaded us, they would loose not only our trading, but would be at war NATO. C'mon man get real.


Sorry I missed that wording, china isn't going to invade us because they don't have the naval power to support such an action. But don't think for a second china would put a steadily devaluing dollar over other interests and not go to war with us.
ETA if we cross the DMZ that in no way obligates NATO but it does in theory obligate China.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

CesumPec said:


> We should have gotten out of SK decades ago. We have no strategic interests there, no bases we can't live without, no natural resources, like oil, that we can't live without. If NK blows up SK, we would have to find a way to live without Kia cars and Samsung smartphones. It would be a disruption, but one we could deal with. we should not be spending our money or risking the lives of our troops to defend SK. They have a vibrant modern economy and should pay for their own defense.
> 
> If our troops were not there, this event would be as important to us as the Syrian civil war.


 Our presence in SK does protect our oil reserves in a sense if you take into consideration NKs proximity to Alaska.


----------



## Appalachia (Jul 11, 2012)

Pops2 said:


> Sorry I missed that wording, china isn't going to invade us because they don't have the naval power to support such an action. But don't think for a second china would put a steadily devaluing dollar over other interests and not go to war with us.
> ETA if we cross the DMZ that in no way obligates NATO but it does in theory obligate China.


I could see a currency manipulation happening easily (worse than they do now).

I don't believe we would cross the DMZ either with anything other than missiles, and that won't happen unless they shoot first. Just like in Top Gun, "Do not fire unless fired upon."


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> What things do we need to work on prepping right now?


Being prepared is *always the same*.
It doesn't change much since your goal remains the same no matter what the crisis du jour


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Shrek said:


> Our presence in SK does protect our oil reserves in a sense if you take into consideration NKs proximity to Alaska.


How so? While PRC & DPRK have a bunch or air & sealift capability to invade AK, even combined they don't have the naval combat power nor the sea based airpower to support such an action.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

By being close we can shoot their bottle rockets down in their own airspace.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

Shrek said:


> By being close we can shoot their bottle rockets down in their own airspace.


Aegis cruiser. Shoots down bottle rockets with no troops required in SK.


----------



## shannsmom (Jul 28, 2009)

barnyardfun said:


> What things do we need to work on prepping right now? Do you have a list of stuff you are trying to acquire in the near future in light of everything going on?


As always, have food, water and other necessities to last as long as possible. Beyond that, it depends on what you think might happen. This is simplified, but if you think a biological attack may occur, think of how you would keep your family at home, is there anything you HAVE to go out for, and do you have masks, etc, and how do you decontaminate yourself when you get home before you enter the house. Expecting nuclear attack? Learn about the risk for your area, possible fallout, how it travels, etc. Basically, do "what if" scenarios and make your plans from there. As in "what if we are at a baseball game and someone releases a chemical weapon? Ok, we have masks, goggles, haircovers,bandanas, etc in a backpack with us, everyone stays together and we leave ASAP" type thing. Nobody has a crystal ball , and most things will never happen, but wouldn't you rather have the items needed to give your family the best protection you can?

I have acquired things over such a long period, I have forgotten where they all came from, but maybe other folks can help you with the cheapest places they are getting their prep items from, if you tell us what you are lacking and wanting.


----------



## KimTN (Jan 16, 2007)

Japan, during WW2, considered attacking main land USA. They decided against it because our populous is so heavily armed. China's people don't have guns. Even if the lights go out, our guns still work. As long as we keep our guns, I think most countries will think twice about an actual physical invasion. Now you know why the UN would like for our citizens to be unarmed.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

I don't see anything coming out of North Korea's posturing. They're throwing another temper tantrum to get the food and supplies they need. Even China has started viewing North Korea as an embarrassing irrelevance.

The real issue is the potential example that North Korea provides for other unfriendly regimes that might be more predisposed to actually use or provide nuclear weaponizes for use against us. I still think we'll see a major US city destroyed with a nuclear weapon moved into place via stealth.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

Darren said:


> I don't see anything coming out of North Korea's posturing. They're throwing another temper tantrum to get the food and supplies they need. Even China has started viewing North Korea as an embarrassing irrelevance.
> 
> The real issue is the potential example that North Korea provides for other unfriendly regimes that might be more predisposed to actually use or provide nuclear weaponizes for use against us. I still think we'll see a major US city destroyed with a nuclear weapon moved into place via stealth.


Invasion of CONUS by a meaningful force, except for the usual Mexican workers or Canadian snowbirds, and except for a token force designed more to agitate than conquer, not possible for decades. There is only one country in the world that has the shipping to support such a thing and that's us. 

A nuke hidden in a shipping container, it seems inevitable especially if Iran gets the tech. I doubt Iran would risk its own cities by doing this directly, but when that tyrannical gov't falls just like Lybia, Syria, Eqypt, etc a nuke will eventually get into the hands of some irrational idiot.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> China's people don't have guns


China's MILITARY does, and it's huge.
What they DON"T have is the* logistics* to get them here in large enough numbers without us knowing they are coming


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Hence the massive armament and brainwashing/training of homeland security, et al, etc.

A combined effort of several hostile nations, plus "our own" government, could make it pretty interesting for that portion of the population that endeavors to stand firmly in their way.

The _world class_ powers that be have lost patience with the portion of this one last nation that stands in the way of their absolute world dominance, and don't *ever* forget that.

I will continue to strongly suspect that the purported NK "saber rattling" is a springboard for what "they" have been planning all along......


----------



## KimTN (Jan 16, 2007)

By China's people, I meant their general populous. Of course their military does. Japan went over there and just did terrible things to the general population. The citizens of China could do nothing to defend themselves against a military force. I guess I could have explained that better in my previous post.


----------



## barefootboy (Sep 30, 2012)

From the standpoint of my prepping , this situation for the most part changes nothing. I have always prepped from the standpoint of the grid going off, the cause not a major aspect. The most extreme case is this sets off a major nuclear exchange between the US and China, which I just can't see.
As to the Korean area itself, even a conventional war would be devistating for the Seoul area, but in turn NK would be leveled. There could be numerous effects on the economy. There is also the possiblity of cyber warfare affecting banks, power grids ,etc. Also, it is not totally impossible to have an EMP attack knocking out the power grid.
*BUT* most of these scenarios are not very likely.

In plain english have your a. water supplies, b. food stocks c. power systems d. finance ( cash etc), e. medical / sanitation and security ( arms, ammo)prepared for as long of a time as you can put together without endangering yourself if nothing happens.

I hope this helps some.


----------



## coup (Feb 28, 2007)

since korean war,police action,whatever we have been rewarding them for bad behavior......nk new leader has seen the father gain by this stuff and could be just bluffing us for gain,,,,he could also be crazier than anyone thinks.....
i had a couple uncles over there and they said we were beat but because we were fighting a limited action an not an all out effort...no one knows what will come.....is always to ones advantage to have no debt,savings,money, food,knowledge,know how,love,patience,children able to choose wisely.

powers in charge seem bent on running are standard of living down.


----------



## Hairsheep (Aug 13, 2012)

It seems to me, that this current Government, in America is self absorbed with its self.
They appear to be running in fear of US.
Why do you think they are buying up MASSIVE amounts of ammo for their various Government agencies and actively seeking to ban ALL of our means of self defense?
It could be, they know, that a dollar collapse is close hand, and things are going to get ugly.
Mean while, do you think North Korea, is also so dumb as to not realize this?
Thus the N.K. 's are testing the waters, to see if they may once again "own" the South.
A land invasion may not be necessary to destroy an enemy...They are simply waiting for us to crash...


----------



## MichaelK! (Oct 22, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> What they DON"T have is the* logistics* to get them here in large enough numbers without us knowing they are coming


That is very true! Right now, China doesn't have the navy it launch a trans-ocean invasion.

But, neither did Japan in the 1930's.

Getting back to my original post, the Chinese would never get here without us knowing about it, IF our surveilance satelite network is functioning. But suppose it isn't? Three years ago, the Chinese tested a satelite destroying missle. Getting back to the idea of an EMP pulse (ala "One Second After"), disabling American electronics would have to be an essential component of a successful attack.

Shipping would still be a critical linchpin. What about that fleet of mothballed container ships anchored in the South China Sea? Are they still there? It's concievable that the Chinese could simply "appropriate" these ships at gunpoint, fuel them, stock them, and steam toward the US. With just a few warships to guard this "fleet" they might make it.

With the electrical grid down and a sudden outbreak of Chinese bird flu just before the EMP pulse, how effectively could we defend the west coast? Yeah, this is way out there and sounds like the plot of Grisham novel, but don't you think the Chinese have thought about it?


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Sure they have, as has their Principle......and it would all have been a done deal some decades ago, had the world powers been able to disarm the American populace.


----------



## katheh (Jul 21, 2012)

If someone popped an EMP over the majority of the US, the Chinese would not need to invade. I suspect we would willingly accept their "help" given their current place in the world economy.


----------



## Hollowdweller (Jul 13, 2011)

RomeGrower said:


> I can see President Reagan getting in their face and letting them know if we hear one more word or action of threat from them we will completely disable their military with whatever force it takes until they are afraid to rattle their sabers again. We're long past that kind of leadership in our Country though.


 
Really? 

After Hamas bombed the barracks in Lebanon and killed all those US Marines Reagan pulled troops OUT of Lebanon.

Also when Iran took our hostages rather than threatening military force Reagan made a backroom deal to sell them weapons in exchange for releasing our hostages.

Reagan was a pragmatist, not a hawk. You are more describing George Bush.


----------



## RomeGrower (Feb 27, 2013)

I remember him to be a man of courage and integrity.


----------

